4 ms·

> And even those that do often have to contend with issues like name changes from marriage, or just forgetting to renew them (you usually get reminders in the m

> And even those that do often have to contend with issues like name changes from marriage, or just forgetting to renew them (you usually get reminders in the mail, but we're talking about people who may not even have a fixed address). Don't we all have to contend with those things? Do minorities and the poor get some sort of free pass on these sorts of obligations? EDIT: added the parent's parenthetical comment since they felt it was important. I don't want to come off as misquoting or quoting out of context.

nknighthb 13y ago
Clever, cutting off the parenthetical. Also clever attempting to derail. Actually, no, pretty pathetic attempt at derailing. Absolutely no one should be subject to these requirements, poor, minority, white, or rich. The fact that they disenfranchise some people is one of the reasons why.
- jack-r-abbit 13y ago
  Pathetic attempt at derailing? Not really. You talked about the millions that don't have an ID. I don't dispute that. But then you talked about all the people that DO have an ID but have to content with keeping it up to date. As if that is some burden unique to minorities and the poor. That is what I dispute. No derailment needed from me. You took it there. Your parenthetical was just you're way to justify why they get a free pass on the things others don't. It was opinion that I didn't feel needed to be quoted. But sure if you want to include it, fine. I disagree with that. You don't need to get a reminder in the mail because the ID itself very clearly states when it needs to be renewed. Rich or poor, black or white... no free passes for being forgetful. Also, are you saying that nobody should have to keep their ID info up to date? Like no one should have to get their ID changed when they get married or move. And that no one should have to remember to get it renewed. I'm confused by that part.
  - nknighthb 13y ago
    None of it should be a prerequisite for voting. I don't know what debate you think is happening here, but it's not the one you seem eager to have. This is about the reasons against requiring IDs for voting and only for voting. It has nothing to do with any of the other reasons you might have ID, nor is it an argument about what the requirements should be for having a valid ID. It is only about requiring ID for voting. That is all. This is why I say you're derailing: You're not talking about voter ID, you're just talking about ID in general.
    - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
      Then why do so many people argue about how it is hard for minorities and the poor to get an ID? If that is not what this is about then it has no place in the argument against requiring an ID to vote. Your original comment was almost entirely about how hard it is for those people to get an ID. So again... no derailment from me. You brought it up.
      - nknighthb 13y ago
        The difficulty of getting an ID is a reason not to require the ID for voting. If you want to make getting an ID easier, good for you. I don't believe for a moment you will succeed, because IDs are used for things other than voting, where their requirements may actually be necessary. The set of necessary requirements for voting may overlap with, but is not identical to the set of necessary requirements for state ID. Unless and until they are identical, requiring the ID for voting is a violation of rights. This will be my last reply to you, because if you still don't understand, you're either never going to, or you already understand all too well and are deliberately derailing.
        jack-r-abbit 13y ago
        Wait. You can't tell me that the difficulty of getting an ID is a reason not to require the ID for voting right after you told me this is not an argument about what the requirements should be for having a valid ID. If one of your reasons for not requiring ID to vote is that they are difficult to get then you pretty much are required to let people argue they are not difficult to get. Otherwise you have presented an argument which you will not let people attempt to refute. I don't think it works that way. A state ID isn't much more than a standardized document that says the state has identified you and can vouch for your identity. If one of the requirements to vote is to be identified, it seems reasonable that the state takes care of that identification in a standardized way.

nknighthb 13y ago

Clever, cutting off the parenthetical. Also clever attempting to derail. Actually, no, pretty pathetic attempt at derailing. Absolutely no one should be subject to these requirements, poor, minority, white, or rich. The fact that they disenfranchise some people is one of the reasons why.

jack-r-abbit 13y ago
Pathetic attempt at derailing? Not really. You talked about the millions that don't have an ID. I don't dispute that. But then you talked about all the people that DO have an ID but have to content with keeping it up to date. As if that is some burden unique to minorities and the poor. That is what I dispute. No derailment needed from me. You took it there. Your parenthetical was just you're way to justify why they get a free pass on the things others don't. It was opinion that I didn't feel needed to be quoted. But sure if you want to include it, fine. I disagree with that. You don't need to get a reminder in the mail because the ID itself very clearly states when it needs to be renewed. Rich or poor, black or white... no free passes for being forgetful. Also, are you saying that nobody should have to keep their ID info up to date? Like no one should have to get their ID changed when they get married or move. And that no one should have to remember to get it renewed. I'm confused by that part.
- nknighthb 13y ago
  None of it should be a prerequisite for voting. I don't know what debate you think is happening here, but it's not the one you seem eager to have. This is about the reasons against requiring IDs for voting and only for voting. It has nothing to do with any of the other reasons you might have ID, nor is it an argument about what the requirements should be for having a valid ID. It is only about requiring ID for voting. That is all. This is why I say you're derailing: You're not talking about voter ID, you're just talking about ID in general.
  - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
    Then why do so many people argue about how it is hard for minorities and the poor to get an ID? If that is not what this is about then it has no place in the argument against requiring an ID to vote. Your original comment was almost entirely about how hard it is for those people to get an ID. So again... no derailment from me. You brought it up.
    - nknighthb 13y ago
      The difficulty of getting an ID is a reason not to require the ID for voting. If you want to make getting an ID easier, good for you. I don't believe for a moment you will succeed, because IDs are used for things other than voting, where their requirements may actually be necessary. The set of necessary requirements for voting may overlap with, but is not identical to the set of necessary requirements for state ID. Unless and until they are identical, requiring the ID for voting is a violation of rights. This will be my last reply to you, because if you still don't understand, you're either never going to, or you already understand all too well and are deliberately derailing.
      - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
        Wait. You can't tell me that the difficulty of getting an ID is a reason not to require the ID for voting right after you told me this is not an argument about what the requirements should be for having a valid ID. If one of your reasons for not requiring ID to vote is that they are difficult to get then you pretty much are required to let people argue they are not difficult to get. Otherwise you have presented an argument which you will not let people attempt to refute. I don't think it works that way. A state ID isn't much more than a standardized document that says the state has identified you and can vouch for your identity. If one of the requirements to vote is to be identified, it seems reasonable that the state takes care of that identification in a standardized way.