Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Voter ID Laws Are Not Racist...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by square_peg View Post
    *patiently whistles
    *drums fingers on desk
    *checks watch

    Done ranting yet? Okay, now listen up. I PERSONALLY DO NOT BELIEVE THESE LAWS HAD RACIST INTENT. Read and re-read that capitalized sentence as many times as necessary until it sinks in. That said, here's why some people do think that.

    1. There are actually quite a few people in this country who are eligible to vote but lack ID.
    1a. The Brennan Center for Justice reports that the number may be as high as 11%.
    2. It logically follows that if ID is required to be able to vote, then those particular folks who lack ID can't vote.

    Now, what's a demographic that has a disproportionately high number of people who lack ID? People of color, who tend to vote Democratic. The concern, then, is that by making ID possession a requirement for voting eligibility, policymakers are preventing some people of color from casting ballots, which, besides serving as a burden that doesn't affect white people quite as much, also skews the true numbers in favor of the Republican party, since people who would've voted Democratic were excluded. If true, the irony would be that those who claim that the laws would facilitate fair elections by preventing voter fraud are actually the ones causing unfair elections with those laws.

    Understand the issue now? As usual, you did little more than mock something that you didn't even understand. You're basically Jorge in that regard.
    And who's fault is it if someone doesn't have a valid ID? It's not the government's fault. There is nothing stopping someone from getting an ID card. Heck, you need an ID card for lots of other things besides voting. Like driving, traveling to another country. cashing a check. Opening a bank account. Getting into a bar. Buying alcohol or cigarettes. I don't think you can even get welfare without an ID card. Yet lots of minorities are on welfare. Should all those things stop requiring ID cards too because some people don't have one? Are they all discriminating against minorities?

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by square_peg View Post
    I'm not sure what you find unclear. You believe that the voter ID laws weren't intended to be racist. As support for that belief, you cited a study that said there haven't been detrimental effects from those laws. But by itself, a lack of detrimental effects doesn't prove that there was no malicious intent. Here's an even simpler analogy than the one I already presented. Let's say that Sparko tries to sneak up behind you and punch you. (For the sake of this analogy, we'll say a prankster attached a "Punch me, I'm liberal" sign to your back.) However, his aim is even worse than his ability to accurately represent people's arguments, so he completely misses. Someone sees this and tells you "Hey. Sparko tried to punch you." You, of course, didn't feel his punch. The fact that you didn't feel any effects is NOT proof that Sparko didn't have the intent to punch you. Likewise, the supposed fact that there weren't negative effects from voter ID laws isn't proof that there was no negative intent behind them.
    Argument from silence is a logical fallacy.

    I could just as easily say that big foot tried to eat you, and just because you are still here is not proof that big foot didn't intend to eat you.

    You can make any claim you want and say that just because there is no evidence for it is not proof that it isn't true.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by square_peg View Post
    The fact that you didn't feel any effects is NOT proof that Sparko didn't have the intent to punch you. Likewise, the supposed fact that there weren't negative effects from voter ID laws isn't proof that there was no negative intent behind them.
    Like I said square, I was playing off the title and the fact that the left was saying that voter ID laws were racist (actually preventing minorities from voting). No one was speaking of "intent." And the fact is, they did not prevent minorities from voting. The so called racial result (fewer minorities voting) did not materialize. And I never believed it would - Blacks and Latinos are not stupid, they know how to get the necessary IDs.

    Leave a comment:


  • fm93
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    And yet you said:

    "That's apparently true as far as the argument itself goes, but it's a far cry from "Therefore, there couldn't have been any racist intent behind the plan."



    Do you ever get tired of contradicting yourself, your majesty?
    And ALSO in the EXACT SAME POST, I explicitly said
    I was mostly challenging seer's questionable logic
    Do you not understand the concept of ultimately agreeing with a person while also pointing out a logical flaw in a specific argument that he uses?


    Seriously. This stuff is written DIRECTLY in the post that YOU quoted. Zymologist read that same post and correctly understood where I stand on this issue. Why are you and Sparko seemingly utterly incapable of doing so?
    Last edited by fm93; 07-02-2014, 09:17 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • KingsGambit
    replied
    Originally posted by Zymologist View Post
    It just makes me wonder why I've never seen anyone oppose ID requirements for the purchase of alcohol (for example) on the same basis as opposition to voting ID.
    The usual response is that there is no constitutional right to buy alcohol while there is to vote. But I don't think the solution is to get rid of ID requirements, but rather to make sure that people who have trouble getting IDs for whatever reason can get one. This would probably also help the economy because it would make it easier for people to get jobs.

    Leave a comment:


  • Zymologist
    replied
    Originally posted by square_peg View Post
    I think it would apply. But what's the relevance here?
    It just makes me wonder why I've never seen anyone oppose ID requirements for the purchase of alcohol (for example) on the same basis as opposition to voting ID.

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by square_peg View Post
    Holy unprintable swear words.

    I EXPLICITLY SAID IN THAT EXACT SAME POST THAT YOU YOURSELF JUST QUOTED THAT I DON'T THINK IT WAS RACISM.
    And yet you said:

    "That's apparently true as far as the argument itself goes, but it's a far cry from "Therefore, there couldn't have been any racist intent behind the plan."



    Do you ever get tired of contradicting yourself, your majesty?

    Leave a comment:


  • fm93
    replied
    Originally posted by Zymologist View Post
    Keeping in mind that I'm taking you to be playing the devil's advocate here, and not necessarily advancing this argument yourself....

    This argument seems odd to me. How would it not apply to any other requirement for ID, such as to purchase alcohol, or gain entrance into certain government buildings?
    I think it would apply. But what's the relevance here?

    The only response I've seen to that is that voting is a right, and purchasing alcohol (for example) is not, but that doesn't address the idea that requirement of the ID would be racist because of the demographic that would be most affected by it.
    I think the argument is that the laws were passed specifically to keep minorities down, which by definition would qualify as institutional racism.



    Originally posted by Joel View Post
    It seems that 2 does not follow, unless you add an additional premise that those who currently lack ID are incapable of obtaining an ID.
    It's not that easy for some people to obtain ID. But either way, there are ultimately people who for whatever reason haven't obtained ID by Election Day, which means that they're prohibited from exercising what should be a constitutional right.

    Leave a comment:


  • fm93
    replied
    Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    Do you have any hard evidence of racism or am I suppose to believe it is racism because you said so?
    Holy unprintable swear words.

    I EXPLICITLY SAID IN THAT EXACT SAME POST THAT YOU YOURSELF JUST QUOTED THAT I DON'T THINK IT WAS RACISM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by square_peg View Post
    Ah, here comes Sparko to once again attack a position that I don't even hold. I'd think that would get exhausting after a while, but apparently not.
    Ummm yeah, you are arguing just for that position. It isn't Sparko's fault that you don't even know what you're arguing for or against. You said it was racist, so present evidence it was. Where is your evidence or is a lack of evidence just more evidence that there is a conspiracy to cover up the truth?

    Leave a comment:


  • lilpixieofterror
    replied
    Originally posted by square_peg View Post
    That's apparently true as far as the argument itself goes, but it's a far cry from "Therefore, there couldn't have been any racist intent behind the plan."


    I personally don't think they were intended to be, but at the same time, I do think it's possible that some people may support such laws for racially influenced reasons. Either way, I was mostly challenging seer's questionable logic, not making a definitive statement.
    Do you have any hard evidence of racism or am I suppose to believe it is racism because you said so?

    Leave a comment:


  • Joel
    replied
    Originally posted by square_peg View Post
    1. There are actually quite a few people in this country who are eligible to vote but lack ID.
    1a. The Brennan Center for Justice reports that the number may be as high as 11%.
    2. It logically follows that if ID is required to be able to vote, then those particular folks who lack ID can't vote.
    It seems that 2 does not follow, unless you add an additional premise that those who currently lack ID are incapable of obtaining an ID.

    Leave a comment:


  • Zymologist
    replied
    Originally posted by square_peg View Post
    *patiently whistles
    *drums fingers on desk
    *checks watch

    Done ranting yet? Okay, now listen up. I PERSONALLY DO NOT BELIEVE THESE LAWS HAD RACIST INTENT. Read and re-read that capitalized sentence as many times as necessary until it sinks in. That said, here's why some people do think that.

    1. There are actually quite a few people in this country who are eligible to vote but lack ID.
    1a. The Brennan Center for Justice reports that the number may be as high as 11%.
    2. It logically follows that if ID is required to be able to vote, then those particular folks who lack ID can't vote.

    Now, what's a demographic that has a disproportionately high number of people who lack ID? People of color, who tend to vote Democratic. The concern, then, is that by making ID possession a requirement for voting eligibility, policymakers are preventing some people of color from casting ballots, which, besides serving as a burden that doesn't affect white people quite as much, also skews the true numbers in favor of the Republican party, since people who would've voted Democratic were excluded.

    Understand the issue now? As usual, you did little more than mock something that you didn't even understand. You're basically Jorge in that regard.
    Keeping in mind that I'm taking you to be playing the devil's advocate here, and not necessarily advancing this argument yourself....

    This argument seems odd to me. How would it not apply to any other requirement for ID, such as to purchase alcohol, or gain entrance into certain government buildings? The only response I've seen to that is that voting is a right, and purchasing alcohol (for example) is not, but that doesn't address the idea that requirement of the ID would be racist because of the demographic that would be most affected by it.

    Leave a comment:


  • fm93
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    How could it even be racist? It's not like the poll worker wouldn't notice someone's race unless they had a photo id.

    "oh no! Mr. Smith. I didn't notice until I saw your photo ID that you are black. We can't allow you to vote!"

    Every state I have lived in as an adult checks IDs at poll stations to verify you are who you are supposed to be, and live where you are registered to vote. And you have to sign a poll book that they compare with your signature on your ID to make sure it matches. It has nothing to do with race. It just prevents voter fraud.

    Or is Obama claiming that only minorities engage in voter fraud and so checking their ID to stop them would be discrimination?
    *patiently whistles
    *drums fingers on desk
    *checks watch

    Done ranting yet? Okay, now listen up. I PERSONALLY DO NOT BELIEVE THESE LAWS HAD RACIST INTENT. Read and re-read that capitalized sentence as many times as necessary until it sinks in. That said, here's why some people do think that.

    1. There are actually quite a few people in this country who are eligible to vote but lack ID.
    1a. The Brennan Center for Justice reports that the number may be as high as 11%.
    2. It logically follows that if ID is required to be able to vote, then those particular folks who lack ID can't vote.

    Now, what's a demographic that has a disproportionately high number of people who lack ID? People of color, who tend to vote Democratic. The concern, then, is that by making ID possession a requirement for voting eligibility, policymakers are preventing some people of color from casting ballots, which, besides serving as a burden that doesn't affect white people quite as much, also skews the true numbers in favor of the Republican party, since people who would've voted Democratic were excluded. If true, the irony would be that those who claim that the laws would facilitate fair elections by preventing voter fraud are actually the ones causing unfair elections with those laws.

    Understand the issue now? As usual, you did little more than mock something that you didn't even understand. You're basically Jorge in that regard.
    Last edited by fm93; 07-02-2014, 05:21 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • fm93
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    Flaw in what reasoning? The "Voter ID Laws Are Not Racist..." was a play on the title in the link. I never thought they were racist or intended to be racist.
    I'm not sure what you find unclear. You believe that the voter ID laws weren't intended to be racist. As support for that belief, you cited a study that said there haven't been detrimental effects from those laws. But by itself, a lack of detrimental effects doesn't prove that there was no malicious intent. Here's an even simpler analogy than the one I already presented. Let's say that Sparko tries to sneak up behind you and punch you. (For the sake of this analogy, we'll say a prankster attached a "Punch me, I'm liberal" sign to your back.) However, his aim is even worse than his ability to accurately represent people's arguments, so he completely misses. Someone sees this and tells you "Hey. Sparko tried to punch you." You, of course, didn't feel his punch. The fact that you didn't feel any effects is NOT proof that Sparko didn't have the intent to punch you. Likewise, the supposed fact that there weren't negative effects from voter ID laws isn't proof that there was no negative intent behind them.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
6 responses
50 views
0 likes
Last Post whag
by whag
 
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
42 responses
234 views
0 likes
Last Post whag
by whag
 
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
24 responses
104 views
0 likes
Last Post Ronson
by Ronson
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
33 responses
190 views
0 likes
Last Post Roy
by Roy
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
73 responses
315 views
0 likes
Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
Working...
X