Poll - The Supreme Court's Ruling

[Hazcat]

Here is another that agrees that there is no BASIC right to vote in the Consitution.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060206/jackson

and more
The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or gender. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the "most numerous branch" of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members.

Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. For example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote. It is interesting to note that though the 26th Amendment requires that 18-year-olds must be able to vote, states can allow persons younger than 18 to vote, if they chose to.

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html

[tombogan03884]

The history of the United States has been to insure and implement the RIGHT to vote to all citizens.

Any suggestion that any citizen should be deprived of the right to vote is antithetical to American history.

The question really is, Do welfare recipients, Those who do nothing but accept government charity, qualify as true citizens, compared to those who work, serve in the military and contribute to the society that that provides the hand outs that support them.  It would seem that Haz and I agree that they do not, while Clay's position seems to be that all that is required is an American born or naturalized pulse.  Does that sum it up in its simplist form ?

[Hazcat]

The question really is, Do welfare recipients, Those who do nothing but accept government charity, qualify as true citizens, compared to those who work, serve in the military and contribute to the society that that provides the hand outs that support them.  It would seem that Haz and I agree that they do not, while Clay's position seems to be that all that is required is an American born or naturalized pulse.  Does that sum it up in its simplist form ?

Does for me.

[tombogan03884]

Here is another that agrees that there is no BASIC right to vote in the Consitution.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060206/jackson

and more
The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or gender. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the "most numerous branch" of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members.

Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. For example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote. It is interesting to note that though the 26th Amendment requires that 18-year-olds must be able to vote, states can allow persons younger than 18 to vote, if they chose to.

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html

Haz is right on this, Article II of the constitution says (second para.) "Each state shall appoint, in such Manner as the legislature thereof may direct..."   All the stuff about 18 and over, Blacks, women and tax debtors were amendmants concerning primaries and "other elections".

[Marshal Halloway]

I think late June will be a new beginning for the second amendment, but I cannot be a fortune teller and tell you which way it will go.

Yes, the Supreme Court will take a new stand and I do believe that the "individual right" will be reestablished as it was meant to be from day 1.

In a recent USA TODAY poll, a solid majority of Americans support the individual right to keep and bear arms.

Problem has been that the combination of knee jerk regulations through political maneuvers with the help of mainstream media has turned the 2nd amendment into a privilege instead of a constitutional right. Will that change after July 1? I doubt it.

When a right is so heavily regulated, it is not a right, it is privileges based on ever changing practicalities. 20,000+ federal, state and local firearms regulations is a living proof of that. The Supreme Court knows it. No matter how they write the ruling, it will have major consequences.

How do we define... or more important.... will the Supreme court ruling touch the question on how to define common sense regulations? Where is the line between a right and a privilege? I don't think the last question will be answered by the Supreme in a black and white setting.

The consequence will without a doubt be new platforms for both sides and the fight is not over.

It will just be a new fight with new arguments.

I have always believed that democracy and politics are also all about how a minority of people can get into a position where they can rule over the majority. This will also be the case after July 1.

[Sponsor]

[Hazcat]

Marshal,

+1 on the majority of your post.

I disagree with your definition of democracy but it does fit politics to a "T".

[DDMac]

Clay, our nation at one time was in fact "The Land of Plenty", with hard working citizens who were full of compassion and self motivation to succeed. That surplus and generous character bloomed into a philosophy that, with a little help, even the struggling can prosper. Government became the vehicle of aid and comfort, and in it's vastness, lost accountability of how the recipients benefited from the assistance. Human nature being what is is, an ever growing number of Citizens have learned that "success" is developing methods to remain, undetected and unaccountable, on the public assistance rolls. Now, when those Citizens exercise their votes, it is without regard to the national consequence and with absolutely no responsibility to provide any resources in return.
I'm not talking about farmers who feed us, Seniors who have provided the prosperity we all enjoy, College students who have the motivation and skills to TRY to fix this mess, or the families who have already paid their withholding taxes. I'm taking issue with those who scam, sham and deceive, having never contributed to what should be united effort to improve our nation and the character of Her people. And yet they vote themselves more..and more, without a scintilla of shame or remorse. They are owed. Some could even argue that our efforts to "improve" on the Founding Father's methods of leadership have gone sadly awry.
Mac.
ps. sorry, I type slow.

[Marshal Halloway]

I disagree with your definition of democracy but it does fit politics to a "T".

I disagree too.... 

I was thinking more about the practical aspect of it.

[Hazcat]

Clay, our nation at one time was in fact "The Land of Plenty", with hard working citizens who were full of compassion and self motivation to succeed. That surplus and generous character bloomed into a philosophy that, with a little help, even the struggling can prosper. Government became the vehicle of aid and comfort, and in it's vastness, lost accountability of how the recipients benefited from the assistance. Human nature being what is is, an ever growing number of Citizens have learned that "success" is developing methods to remain, undetected and unaccountable, on the public assistance rolls. Now, when those Citizens exercise their votes, it is without regard to the national consequence and with absolutely no responsibility to provide any resources in return.
I'm not talking about farmers who feed us, Seniors who have provided the prosperity we all enjoy, College students who have the motivation and skills to TRY to fix this mess, or the families who have already paid their withholding taxes. I'm taking issue with those who scam, sham and deceive, having never contributed to what should be united effort to improve our nation and the character of Her people. And yet they vote themselves more..and more, without a scintilla of shame or remorse. They are owed. Some could even argue that our efforts to "improve" on the Founding Father's methods of leadership have gone sadly awry.
Mac.
ps. sorry, I type slow.

Well said.

And I'm glad about your typing cause I read slow!

[tombogan03884]

Clay, our nation at one time was in fact "The Land of Plenty", with hard working citizens who were full of compassion and self motivation to succeed. That surplus and generous character bloomed into a philosophy that, with a little help, even the struggling can prosper. Government became the vehicle of aid and comfort, and in it's vastness, lost accountability of how the recipients benefited from the assistance. Human nature being what is is, an ever growing number of Citizens have learned that "success" is developing methods to remain, undetected and unaccountable, on the public assistance rolls. Now, when those Citizens exercise their votes, it is without regard to the national consequence and with absolutely no responsibility to provide any resources in return.
I'm not talking about farmers who feed us, Seniors who have provided the prosperity we all enjoy, College students who have the motivation and skills to TRY to fix this mess, or the families who have already paid their withholding taxes. I'm taking issue with those who scam, sham and deceive, having never contributed to what should be united effort to improve our nation and the character of Her people. And yet they vote themselves more..and more, without a scintilla of shame or remorse. They are owed. Some could even argue that our efforts to "improve" on the Founding Father's methods of leadership have gone sadly awry.
Mac.
ps. sorry, I type slow.

Good things are worth waiting for. Well stated.