McAwful wants to make "Are you a U.S. citizen" check box optional when registering

OC for ME said:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxxvi

Click to expand...

http://moga.mo.gov/MoStatutes/ConstHTML/A010251.html

OC for ME said:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxxvi

Click to expand...

OMG - it's hiding in plain view. ..:lol:

Amendment XXVI

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.

Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged...

Click to expand...

What is VOTE?

Suffrage; the expression of his will, preference, or choice, formally manifested by a member of a legislative or deliberative body, or of a constituency or a body of qualified electors, in regard to the decision to be made by the body as a whole upon any proposed measure or proceeding, or the selection of an officer or representative. And the aggregate of the expressions of will or choice, thus manifested by individuals, is called tlie "vote of the body." See Maynard v. Board of Canvassers, 84 Midi. 228, 47 N. W. 756, 11 L. R. A. 332; Gillespie v. Palmer, 20 Wis. 546; Davis v. Brown, 46 W. Va. 716, 34 S. E. 839.

http://thelawdictionary.org/vote/

Click to expand...

What is SUFFRAGE?

A vote; the act of voting; the right or privilege of casting a vote at public elections. The last is the meaning of the term in such phrases as "the extension of the suffrage." "universal suffrage," etc. See Spitzer v. Fulton, 33 Misc. Rep. 257, 08 N. Y. Supp. COO.

http://thelawdictionary.org/suffrage/

Click to expand...

We do not have the right to vote, have suffrage...OK.

OC for ME said:

We do not have the right to vote, have suffrage...OK.

Click to expand...

As seen from both sides of the mirror

U.S. Constitution is not explicit on the right to vote, Wisconsin Rep. Mark Pocan says

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...stitution-not-explicit-right-vote-wisconsin-/

Click to expand...

The individual citizen has no [explicit] federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States unless and until the state legislature chooses a statewide election as the means to implement its power to appoint members of the Electoral College. U.S. Const., Art. II, §1.

The right to vote is protected in more than the initial allocation of the franchise. Equal protection applies as well to the manner of its exercise. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person's vote over that of another.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZPC.html

Click to expand...

I duhknow, maybe I ain't as sharp as I once was.

YMMV

Nightmare said:

Why read so carefully the 2A to see what it really says, rather than what TPTB wants us to think, but then blindly accept their version of a right that does not exist.

All three of those amendments presume a right to vote never mentioned in the founding documents. Does a felon have an affirmative right to vote? Where is that infringement allowed?

Click to expand...

You are trying too hard to retain your position. Why is it that a felon must be convicted to revoke his right to vote via due process. Go forth and do as you see fit. Not worth arguing the point(s). The words are there for all to read...read as you see fit.

Grapeshot said:

As seen from both sides of the mirror

Click to expand...

Sorry Grape, and my fellow members, I will now return to our regularly scheduled thread topic.

Checking, or not checking, a box on a voter form does not (will not) yield a nice gat for personal use before "destroyed." Follow the money. Then again, all the dead folks have voted, moving on to illegals.

OC for ME said:

Sorry Grape, and my fellow members, I will now return to our regularly scheduled thread topic.

...

Click to expand...

Before you go, would you mind reading Section 4 of Article 1? https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#section4

or

Section 6 of Article 1 here? http://constitution.legis.virginia.gov/

QED

stay safe.

skidmark said:

Before you go, would you mind reading Section 4 of Article 1? https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#section4

Click to expand...

Section 4. The times, places and manner of holding elections...

Click to expand...

Defines the process for holding elections.

or

Section 6 of Article 1 here? http://constitution.legis.virginia.gov/

QED

stay safe.

Click to expand...

Similar intent with explicit language as the MO constitution. Then again, some may have (use) a differing definition of suffrage.

Section 6. Free elections; consent of governed. That all elections ought to be free; and that all men, having sufficient evidence of permanent common interest with, and attachment to, the community, have the right of suffrage...

Click to expand...

Again, sorry for the drift.

Ah! The "right of suffrage" - in other words the right to vote. Some people have rights, others do not or may have their rights restricted/taken away.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/suffrage

stay safe.

Citizen said:

So, society only moves forward because of government?

Click to expand...

Red herring alert.

Citizen said:

Alternatively, by "moves forward" you mean the steady diminishment of freedom that's been going on in America under the federal government since administration of George Washington?

Click to expand...

By "steady diminishment of freedom" you mean the end of African Slavery in this nation, the end of children being used as disposable labor in highly dangerous work environments in this nation, not treating women as chattel property of their husbands, equal rights of those of Asian decent, equal rights for unpopular religious minorities, and legal protections fo homosexuals, elimination of State sponsored churches, and increased respect for freedom of the press and freedom of speech, all since the federal Constitution was adopted?

Citizen said:

Actually, your question contains a false premise--that government moves a society forward.

Click to expand...

And your response contains the false overt statement that freedom has universally declined under our Constitutional form of government. Indeed, even for free, white, male landowners, one can make the case that practical freedom has increased in several significant areas since the 18th century including freedom of religion, freedom of press/speech, privacy rights, ability to freely (and safely) travel, etc. Not all such improvements are brought to us by government. But the presence of government seems not to have hindered them, especially when compared to other areas of the world where government is de facto not present. And in some cases, major government projects such as the transcontinental railroad, Panama Canal, and InterState Freeway System have materially aided effective freedom.

Charles

skidmark said:

Have you researched the history of a) why they lose, among other things, their franchise and b) the arguments it took (in places where it has been done) to restore voting rights to them while not restoring other rights?

If they have served their time and want their rights restored why are they not buttonholing members of the General Assembly to make that happen? Who is doing all that lobbying "on their behalf" and what drives those folks to do that?

Click to expand...

I'd be interested in knowing the history of the lifetime loss of rights for felons including both RKBA and the franchise.

I'm of the opinion that if a man can't be trusted to exercise ALL of his rights then he can't be trusted to walk the streets unsupervised. Note that leaves open the door for a period of supervised parole between incarceration and being allowed to once again walk the streets unsupervised. But I'm of the opinion that if a man has paid his debt to society he ought to have all of his rights respected.

If there is a good reason in theory or practice to take another course, I'm open to learning about it.

All this is ignoring my belief that a lot of crimes now considered "felonies" (with lifetime loss of rights whether jail time was ever imposed or not) have no business being felonies. Indeed, for the last 5 or 10 years, most of the anti-RKBA bills to surface in the Utah legislature have been what we call "felony creep" bills. Directly attacking RKBA has become a real loser here politically. But every year some number of politicians on both side of the aisle want to "get tough on criminals" by making relatively minor crimes into felonies that impose lifetime loss of RKBA, or making it ever easier to get protective orders that impose "temporary" (up to a year or more) loss of RKBA with only minimal due process.

I think there are crimes that deserve lifetime loss of rights....by imposing lifetime sentences of one kind or another.

Anyway, I do welcome any data or links you can provide as to the reasoning behind lifetime loss of rights for felons.

Charles

Charles -

It's a case of a quick, down-and-dirty answer or write a book.

Using just English history, go look at how one became an outlaw and what that meant before someone turned the meaning 180* to identify one who breaks the law(s).

With the passage of time the notion of "compelling government interest" grew alongside the notion that certain enumerated rights (1A, 3A, 4A, 5A, 6A, and 8A) probably ought to apply even to those who were outlawed (which by that time pretty much had come to mean unworthy of holding positions of trust). Loss of 2A and 7A were the only enumerated rights that directly impinged on a loss of ability to hold a position of trust. The rest of the "penalties" were purely civil matters such as qualifying for a license created because of a compelling government interest or certain specific positions of trust (Notary, liquor license, hack license (now pretty much done away with except in states such as VA where hacks (taxi drivers) are also conservators of the peace).

stay safe.

OC for ME said:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxix

Click to expand...

OC for ME said:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxxvi

Click to expand...

OC for ME said:

http://moga.mo.gov/MoStatutes/ConstHTML/A010251.html

Click to expand...

OC for ME said:

We do not have the right to vote, have suffrage...OK.

Click to expand...

OC for ME said:

... The words are there for all to read...read as you see fit.

Click to expand...

OC for ME said:

Defines the process for holding elections.

Similar intent with explicit language as the MO constitution. Then again, some may have (use) a differing definition of suffrage.

Again, sorry for the drift.

Click to expand...

skidmark said:

Ah! The "right of suffrage" - in other words the right to vote. Some people have rights, others do not or may have their rights restricted/taken away.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/suffrage

stay safe.

Click to expand...

I guess we could go on fer a wee bit longer and agree to being agreeable. Anyway, when you get around to actually reading what I have posted we can move on back to the topic posed in the OP.

Suffrage: noun affranchisement, autonomy, choice, emancipation, enfranchisement, exemption from connrol, exemption from restraint, franchise, freedom, freeeom of choice, liberation, liberty, license, manumission, option, popular decision, prerogative, right to vote, say, self-determination, self-government, suffragium, voice, vote.

Associated concepts: election law, voters' rights.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Sufferage

Click to expand...

What is SUFFRAGE? A vote; the act of voting; the right or privilege of casting a vote at public elections. The last is the meaning of the term in such phrases as "the extension of the suffrage." "universal suffrage," etc. See Spitzer v. Fulton, 33 Misc. Rep. 257, 08 N. Y. Supp. COO.

http://thelawdictionary.org/suffrage/

Click to expand...

Suffrage Law & Legal Definition

Suffrage is the right or privilege of casting a vote at a public election. It also means a vote or the act of voting.

The word suffrage comes from Latin suffragium, meaning "vote". Suffrage is used to describe not only the legal right to vote, but also to the practical question of the opportunity to vote, which is sometimes denied those who have a legal right. In the United States, extension of suffrage was part of Jacksonian democracy.

In United States the eligibility to vote is determined by both federal and state law. In the U.S. only a citizen has the right to vote. In the absence of any federal or state law, each state has its own discretion to establish qualifications for suffrage and candidacy within their own jurisdiction. The Unites States Constitution specifically states about the right to vote.

The Voting Rights Act, 1965 governs the voting rights in Unites States. The Statute specifically states that the voting right of a person cannot be abridged for reasons like:

1. The no religious test clause;

2. Race, color, or previous condition of servitude;

3. On account of sex;

4. By reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax; and

5. Who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote. [42 U.S.C. 1973]

Click to expand...

This is the last I will comment on the definition of suffrage, the right to vote. Both terms are used in various state constitutions as well as the federal constitution. Those who deny the explicit intent of their meaning and use...have a good day.