It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Requiring ID to exercise a constitutional right

page: 2
65
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:24 AM
link   
a reply to: XTexan

Last time I remember one has to identify himself,otherwise you are promoting fraud,yes you should have to show ID,thats a no brainer,and by trying to play word games,doesn't change a fact




posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: XTexan

Some yes, some no. Some rights are simply for being human, some are for being a citizen. Should that visiting French man be allowed to vote in our elections? No, obviously not. The right to vote is however guaranteed to every CITIZEN in the United States. Some things are just basic common sense. Proving you're an actual living citizen before you vote should not only be a matter of common sense, it's actually a matter on national security.

As I said some rights are directly connected to citizenship, and some are not.


2nd time I've seen that about voting, can you give me a quote so I can put it in the OP?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: XTexan


What is to stop say a large enough group of people from a foreign country/government from bringing in a large enough group of "Undocumented" individuals, organize and motivate others to hate the Constitution, get people elected into our government and completely take over this country if in fact anyone here whether a citizen or not could vote in our election?


Sun Tzu would be proud of that tactic because the people of a country would be stupid enough to allow a complete take over of their country and it's beliefs and values without a shot ever being fired......



People should have to prove they are a citizen of the United States in order to vote in our elections, otherwise, see above....



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: XTexan

why yes it does,
bolding mine,


As Professor Epps makes clear, not only is there a right to vote in the Constitution, but it’s the single right that appears most often in the Constitution’s text – five times in all. In fact, four separate Amendments – the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th – even use the same powerful language to protect it: “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged . . . .” Of course, like every other constitutional right, the right to vote is subject to reasonable restrictions. Nevertheless, it’s just as much a constitutional right as any other embodied in our Constitution.
Yes, There Is A Right To Vote In The Constitution


so you can plainly see that the Constitution says citizens of the United States. not every tom, dick and jesus.


edit on 26-1-2017 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)


ETA: also if you have a green card or work visa you have limited rights, not full rights . all you have to do is look it up.
edit on 26-1-2017 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: XTexan
So my question for the ATS community is this: Is it ok/right/legal for the government to require ID from a citizen in order for that citizen to exercise a constitutional right.


I love this aspect of the debate, because the two most common sides both do the same thing.

In very broad generalizations:

- the right is more likely to want ID to vote, but more likely to say that ID/background checks to buy firearms are wrong.

- the left is more likely to want ID/background checks to buy firearms, but more likely to say that ID to vote is wrong.

Both sides equally undermine themselves. There is no actual right solution available to both sides due to internal inconsistencies in their own logic.

Somebody else mentioned that, where a right belongs to a citizen, it could be reasonable to expect someone to establish that they are a citizen in order to exercise that right. That seems a reasonable-ish position if the line is drawn there and no further - a citizen is enough, not a citizen "with permission to..." do whatever, just confirming that they are a citizen. The issue then falls to how this can be done, and that is where it all starts to get a bit... messy.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:38 AM
link   
I lean left on most issues, but yes a picture ID to vote should be mandatory.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Last Spring I changed my voter registration and guess what? I was given a VOTER ID CARD. What's so hard about it?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Christosterone
Flying on a plane requires a photo ID...

If I'm not on your plane your ID has nothing to do with me yet I support the airline checking the IDs of every person on every plane…

Voting, on the other hand, affects me and every other citizen so why not make sure they are who they say they are…

is easy to get a photo ID if u can't get a drivers license…

What is the logic in requiring a photo ID for plane travel but not for voting???

-Chris

Flying on a plane or driving a car are privileges not rights.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Christosterone
Flying on a plane requires a photo ID...

If I'm not on your plane your ID has nothing to do with me yet I support the airline checking the IDs of every person on every plane…

Voting, on the other hand, affects me and every other citizen so why not make sure they are who they say they are…

is easy to get a photo ID if u can't get a drivers license…

What is the logic in requiring a photo ID for plane travel but not for voting???

-Chris

Flying on a plane or driving a car are privileges not rights.


So why all the gun restrictions from the left?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: EvillerBob

What about those of us in the middle that think an ID for both is reasonable?

I happen to think a license should be necessary to possess a gun with the requirements you can demonstrate full knowledge of basic firearm safety.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: XTexan

the consitution you cite is :

the consitution of the united states of america

and the rights it infers [ inc the bill of rights ] applies to :

citizens of the united states of america

it beggars belief that you need to ask this absurd question



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: XTexan
a reply to: Puppylove

If someone vists from say... France. They are not a citizen, are they given rights? We do pick and choose, I imagine they get a lawyer, but no guns or voting. Is this covered via treaties? Or is it a case by case basis? Just curious.

Does the bill of rights or constitution, expressly state that the rights included in the bill of rights only apply to citizens?


Sort of.

The constitution distinguishes between "the people" and "citizens" - only the latter, for instance, is allowed to vote - but it is never made clear who "the people" are.

Sure, the Constitution starts by mentioning "we, the people of the United States", but who that really is, who it includes and just as importantly who it excludes, is a matter the courts has all but ignored.

The Harvard Law Review had a paper on it: THE MEANING(S) OF “THE PEOPLE” IN THE CONSTITUTION where it is clear that is still room for the courts to make that interpretation.


(sorry if it as a bit off topic, but I find such questions fascinating.)


edit on 26-1-2017 by DupontDeux because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Good question, you forgot serviceman though.
You sign a contract that can deny you your constitutional rights, so what's applicable to those who chose to support the rights of their countrymen by signing away their own?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: eNumbra
The way the constitution reads; those rights belong to everyone, because they're human beings, and those rights outlined therein are ones upon which the government is forbidden to trod.

It may provide the definition of what makes a citizen, but never does it claim only citizens have those rights.


It is statements like the above that tell me that we really do need to investigate who voted.
How many people believe such nonsense.

Look at the Constitutional amendments. ALL say "citizen".


Amendment 15 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Amendment 19 The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Amendment 24 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Amendment 26 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.


That is pretty clear.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: XTexan

Unacceptable!



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 11:14 AM
link   
The rights in the constitution are rights of the citizens. We can be required to show proof to use those rights.

There are also inalienable rights that all people are supposed to have. These are set up by the UN. I do not know which of these rights we have or the particular interpretations of these laws. I also do not know if our laws Trump these inalienable rights or if Trump can trump these rights. Inalienable rights do not allow you to go to a country if you do not do it correctly.

www.un.org...



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah

originally posted by: eNumbra
The way the constitution reads; those rights belong to everyone, because they're human beings, and those rights outlined therein are ones upon which the government is forbidden to trod.

It may provide the definition of what makes a citizen, but never does it claim only citizens have those rights.


It is statements like the above that tell me that we really do need to investigate who voted.
How many people believe such nonsense.

Look at the Constitutional amendments. ALL say "citizen".



Amendment 15 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Amendment 19 The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Amendment 24 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Amendment 26 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.


That is pretty clear.




"Amendment 19 The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex".........This does not give you the right to have sex in the voting booth.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 11:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: eNumbra
The way the constitution reads; those rights belong to everyone, because they're human beings, and those rights outlined therein are ones upon which the government is forbidden to trod.

It may provide the definition of what makes a citizen, but never does it claim only citizens have those rights.


Is it your contention then that the founders intended for everyone in the world to be able to vote in our elections?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Want free speech? Sure! Just step over here, let us scan your ID with your address so we know who you are and where you live.

Want to vote? Sure! Now we require you to show this special ID to prove you're an American. Never mind people on the street sell these ID's to anyone who wants them down on Santa Monica and Western.

Don't worry, now that special federal IDs are required to vote there's no reason for you or anyone else to be questioning the validity of who's elected into office. Anywhere. In fact, how about we make that a crime too?

These good ideas just seem to rain from the sky under a Trump admin. Why didn't I vote for the guy?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Isn't proof of citizenship just guaranteeing you are entitled to all that goes with it?

I think along with a birth certificate, they should now offer a "birth card".

And when a person becomes a new citizen a card should be included.

Proving residency is specific to certain situations. Doesn't the DMV offer free ID cards? (For those without a license)



new topics

top topics



 
65
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join