We did indeed have tax cuts, but what was the price to pay? Are we more concerned with money? Should we care? Why are we a slave to money? Can this be fixed?
2007-01-16 00:35:58 · 16 answers · asked by rockstar540 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
How would you possibly develop such a test and convince everybody that it's fair and logical? Short answer: you couldn't. So you're only hope, if you don't want votes wasted by stupid people, is to participate in voter education. Teach the public about the issues and they'll vote accordingly!
2007-01-16 04:05:09 · answer #1 · answered by N.FromVT 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
And who decides what's moral? How about our ex-head of the House committe on Exploited children, Mark Foley? or maybe Jack Abramoff?
The Constitution gives EVERY citizen the right to vote. And for a very good reason--any scheme which imposes some kind of "standard" always ends up being a way of disenfranchising someone that someone else doesn't happen to like.
2007-01-16 04:47:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Heinline (sp?) offered this scheme in his "Starship Troopers". You get your right to vote only once you have proven your responsibility. How do you prove you can act responsibly? You join the army and serve your tour from start to finish. If you don't like the service you can quit at any time but once you do you cannot reenlist and therefore and forfeit your voting rights. The author was branded as a fascist.
2007-01-16 08:41:04 · answer #3 · answered by Street Gerbil 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, Everyone has the right to vote. who would this test be administered by and who's opinion on "low morals" would be used? If this were the case then anyone who might not see things the way someone else wanted them to would be labeled "low morals" It could be you....When we start excluding people based on morals then it paves the way to be excluded for other reasons....their religion.....their race.....the way they raise their children......how much money they make and so on.
2007-01-16 00:51:21 · answer #4 · answered by Robin L 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Who gets to decide what's "moral"? If we let those in power decide, then they'll rig it so if you want vote them out of office then you're immoral and can't vote. In the end it wouldn't matter anyway: if most people are immoral then no form of government will work.
2007-01-16 07:28:11 · answer #5 · answered by Faeldaz M 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i'm surprised you would advocate such a thing. if we used this system, then we'd test the people running for office too, right?
and sorry, but that would mean the majority of the politicians who just got elected wouldn't have been allowed to run.
not to mention, if someone has bad morals, you don't think they wouldn't lie on a test?
2007-01-16 00:41:34 · answer #6 · answered by political junkie 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think you got it reversed. May be we should test the morals of the candidates. however voting is only done in democratic countries, and in democracy there is no standard.
2007-01-16 02:47:37 · answer #7 · answered by Iqbal 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
And tax cuts are bad how? Perhaps you have enough money to give to an inept organization but this girl doesn't. I want my money to stay in my pockets, you go and steal from someone else.
2007-01-16 00:45:36 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think we need a moral test for those who want to run for political office instead!
2007-01-16 00:41:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You're clueless.....
We can develop a test but who decides who has morals? You? What if I decide that you do not have the moral aptitude to vote?
2007-01-16 00:43:27 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋