Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Arx]

While that stance sounds reasonable it continues to not be the citation that is needed.

You'd be amazed how many true things are not the subject of peer-reviewed studies!

Look, I don't want to get into the details, but this is not "conjecture", it's tested. It's also not contrary to the current consensus, which is that sexuality is fluid. Everything the brain does is subject to the will under the right circumstances. You can learn to control your hypothalamic temperature regulation system, why would you think a much more abstract, higher-level autonomic process would be less accessible?

I don't actually care if I'm believed, though. I merely wish to state the truth with vigor. The rest is up to the listener!

Wikipedia provides a handy overview of the literature if you look up sexual fluidity. The overwhelming majority of people, especially straight men, have fixed sexual identities. The consensus is that sexuality is mostly of biological origin - genetic or epigenetic, I guess.

If you have a contradictory test, feel free to share it. In fact, please do. However, the volume with which you declare something doesn't change its truth.

Of course, if your stance is that you reject the outside world and only speak what you consider the truth, listener be damned, then that's on you. I don't suppose anyone should spend time talking with you, even?

[Maximum Spin]

Greater access to the ballot box is good.

Why?

An alternative interpretation is that you have proven yourself incompetent to vote at least once. In fact, the assertion:

Voter registration errors prevent people from voting on a regular basis

only demonstrates that many people may not be competent to vote, which, frankly, is also obvious to anyone who has to deal with the public regularly.

[martinuzz]

Greater access to the ballot box is good.

Why?

Because that's how a democracy works?

[Arx]

No, Martin, only people who are smart are allowed to vote. Naturally, that means only people who agree with me.

[Maximum Spin]

Greater access to the ballot box is good.

Why?

Because that's how a democracy works?

Is it? Historically, most democracies did not work that way. Is free access to the polls in fact a better way to run a democracy than restricting the franchise to landowners, for example, or to adult male Athenian citizens? If so, why? There has to be a concrete reason, it can't just be a feeling.

I actually think it is, but I'm not going to do the work for you, you have to find your own reason.

[dragdeler]

-

[dragdeler]

-

[martinuzz]

Disenfranchisement of any fraction of your population by means of revoking voting rights erodes the glue that makes our democratic state of law stick together.

We acknowledge the laws we have because we periodically get a vote on who gets to uphold, change, and guard the laws.
Removing the right to vote is a breach of social contract.
Those affected then have a just cause to declare the state of law null and void.
The state can respond to this in three ways.

They can acknowledge the breach of social contract and allow the disenfranchised to disregard the law. This is where you are no longer a democracy, but an anarchy.

They can ignore the breach of social contract and still force the law upon the disenfranchised. This is where the state is no longer a democracy, but a dictatorship.

Or they can pretend that revoking voting rights of parts of your population is normal, this is where the state is no longer a democracy, but it is the USA.

(Also, Athens was not a democracy, it was a republic.
And while voting rights for landowners were seen, in those times they became a thing, as progressive and democratic, it was in fact just bureaucraticized feodalism. Or representative oligarchy, call it what you will but not democracy.)

[Maximum Spin]

(Also, Athens was not a democracy, it was a republic.

(Oh, then do I have bad news for you about the US.)

(And as pertains to lol social contract theory, lol social contract theory.)

[Starver]

Ofcourse, blind people and people with other disabilities that make driving impossible should just get the driver's license without needing lessons first.

Old British joke: An American tourist is on her first day in London, fresh off the plane, and walking down one of its 'quaint little streets' (perhaps Oxford, or Regent...) and hears a high-pitched beeping sound.

Slightly alarmed, she turns to a random person walking the same way (briefly alarming him, in the process) and asks what it is. She's told that it's a pedestrian crossing, and that is for the benefit of the blind, to inform them that the lights are red for traffic.

"Gee... How considerate y'all are! Back home, they don't even let them drive!"


(This ancient joke is courtesy of Readers' Digest, c.'80s, perhaps. Or maybe The Wheeltappers And Shunters Social Club/similar.)

[MrRoboto75]

The only reason Georgia is clamping down on voters is because otherwise who's in power won't win a fair reelection.

[Random_Dragon]

The only reason Georgia is clamping down on voters is because otherwise who's in power won't win a fair reelection.

This. Anyone who claims otherwise is arguing from a position of bad faith and should be given the same amount of consideration as the people who still think the capital attack was a peaceful protest. :V

[Doomblade187]

The only reason Georgia is clamping down on voters is because otherwise who's in power won't win a fair reelection.

This. Anyone who claims otherwise is arguing from a position of bad faith and should be given the same amount of consideration as the people who still think the capital attack was a peaceful protest. :V

And they have the gall to say they're "increasing voter access".

[Bumber]

I would imagine that everyone here would agree that giving Russian trolls greater access to the ballot box is bad, so clearly a line needs to be drawn somewhere.

I'm pretty sure that you need some form of ID to open a bank account, etc., so it's not too unreasonable an ask. We need to have a way to make sure that people are who they say they are when they vote. Efforts should be taken to make sure everybody has access to a valid ID.

[Arx]

Where I live, ID is mandatory to vote. The idea of voting without it is completely absurd, even, so much is it ingrained into normality for me. It's also basically compulsory to have a national ID (everything administrative of note will expect it, from your final school exams to job interviews to banks), but it's issued for free (unless you lose it and have to replace it) at only the cost of sitting in a Home Affairs queue for an unholy duration. The paperwork is easy, too.

So needing ID to vote makes total sense here and works well, because it's part of society. You get your ID in the school holidays while you're a kid and then you have it and you're done. The US doesn't have that expectation. Pushing through something that restricts access to voting without some kind of phased introduction that allows everyone who has legally been able to vote in the past to continue to vote by the next election (of any kind) is very fishy.

So I'd be fine with these regulations if non driver ID were freely available through a process that anyone could follow, with an opportunity to do it without any job risk (basically everyone here is legally required to be given 15 days of PTO per year, so you can sit in a queue for a day without losing your job). I gather that's not the case in Georgia, so it's either short sighted or in bad faith.