OxymoronP
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2009
- Messages
- 2,175
- Reaction score
- 795
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
It's the other way around, trust me.
Thats the world we live in
It's the other way around, trust me.
The vagina is a very powerful thing.Yikes.
....
WTF does marital status have to do with voting?
That's about the size of things. What the Warden says, goes.
As with most every other topic, it's all about money.
Single women typically use the government to provide the economic security a husband brings to the home, while married women do not.
Husbands who do a poor job of bringing home the bacon are replaced by the wife with government assistance in the same way. Also, when the government steps in to provide, unmarried men feel free of any obligation to their children.
The reasoning behind the idea of banning governmental aid recipients from voting is so that they don't keep voting themselves more money or keeping big-gov politicians in office.
This is also the exact same reason why single women should not be allowed to vote, but I digress.
Well felons rights have been taken away by the courts. A felon can have their rights to life and liberty revoked by the court system, voting rights are no different.
Ahem.. just because a woman is single does not mean that she is depending on the government for ****.
Where do you get these hairbrained ideas??
So while you say "typically" to remove responsibility from yourself by painting all with the same brush - you stated above that single women should be denied voting privileges.
Are you really that Neanderthal'ish?
We also restrict voting privileges to felons. Being able to vote is a privilege.
As with most every other topic, it's all about money.
Single women typically use the government to provide the economic security a husband brings to the home, while married women do not.
Husbands who do a poor job of bringing home the bacon are replaced by the wife with government assistance in the same way. Also, when the government steps in to provide, unmarried men feel free of any obligation to their children.
Since women who are single or commit fiscal infidelity increase the size of government, which in turn further harms the family and the individual, such women are a source of harm and should be disempowered from creating further damage.
Civilly debating a controversial point of view: So easy even this cave-man can do it :2wave:
Same argument was made about blacks and women.
Well in the general sence, since 17 and under are not allowed to vote it means that the goverment can decide the qualifications thus it becomes a privilege.
I was perfectly civil in my response to you.
Is that the only thing you have to say to me or would you like to expound more upon your OUT dated ideas of a woman's "place" in society?
Indeed, ie, if you take from the workers and give to the bosses."The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
Obviously you've never been a boss. :roll:Indeed, ie, if you take from the workers and give to the bosses.
I've seen various people on this site claim that people on governmental aid shouldn't be allowed to vote. Now my thought is that voting is a fundamental right, as we live in a democratic republic. Voting is what makes this a democratic form of government (can we please not quibble over semantics), as opposed to some sort of oligarchy, and as thus shouldn't be taken away without due process. What are your thoughts?
I've seen various people on this site claim that people on governmental aid shouldn't be allowed to vote. Now my thought is that voting is a fundamental right, as we live in a democratic republic. Voting is what makes this a democratic form of government (can we please not quibble over semantics), as opposed to some sort of oligarchy, and as thus shouldn't be taken away without due process. What are your thoughts?
Nor will I ever. I earn my own living.Obviously you've never been a boss. :roll:
Nor will I ever. I earn my own living.
Civilly debating a controversial point of view: So easy even this cave-man can do it :2wave:
That's special. Since you are unmanageable and unpromotable, I will therefore discount your opinion of bosses. Have a nice day.Nor will I ever. I earn my own living.
Profit immensely from my labor.ROFL wtf do you think your bosses do?
… The reasoning behind the idea of banning governmental aid recipients from voting is so that they don't keep voting themselves more money or keeping big-gov politicians in office.
This is also the exact same reason why single women should not be allowed to vote, but I digress.
The danger in creating a requirement of financial independence is that you invariably create new ways to abuse the system. Title19 and SMART users are those we have in mind to keep from voting, but what about those using section8 housing assistance, Social Security, or veteran's benefits?
The greater evil is blocking those on government assistance from voting. The problem of big government must be dealt with another way.
… I claimed that women would use the government for money …
I claimed that expanding government was an established voting trend of single women …
:rofl
If you feel you're capable of challenging my position on an intellectual level then please feel free to try. I claimed that women would use the government for money, not for thinking. Give it your best :2wave:
I claimed that expanding government was an established voting trend of single women, and here's a link:
Greenberg Quinlan Rosner | News
As Democrat policies such as Universal Health Care expand government, while Republican policies such as school vouchers reduce the size of government, and that these examples represent the typical difference between the Left and the Right, this graph clearly represents my claim of single women expanding government.