Voting Rights, Property Rights and Original Intent

[nadinbrzezinski]

Yes, republicans are GOING THERE.... if you do not own property you have no skin in game... ergo you should not have the right to vote.

BUT, but... how can this be Constitutional? Actually of all the Original Intent bunk arguments they like to make this one is EASY as pie... Property and voting rights are in the Federalists...

So be ready for THIS ARGUMENT... and sadly it is easy as pie to make. Of course the logical extension, since the Founders were quite clear on this as well... (Letters of Abigail to her husband, Adams for example) is that women should not have the franchise.

Now it is clear Republicans are not thinking of the 1950s... oh no siree, they are thinking of the 1750s... and it gets worst... this is back to the future/ This happened in places like Bosten between 1650 and 1750... where the franchise was increasingly closed down... to guarantee the wealthy controlled the councils of government

[Fresh_Start]

1. counter proposal is no taxation without representation

so if you don't have a vote...you also don't have to pay taxes...that will start a stampede of GOP to lose their voting privileges

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. That was the revolutionary motto

but it was the same Founders that actually established the idea of property rights tied to voting... that was because there was no IRS... (how you counter this)... and the ONLY taxes you paid, were property taxes. There were TEMPORARY levies for things like war (to pay the war of 1812 for example, or a local bridge when not funded through private corporations founded for this purpose ONLY). But for the most part taxes in the late 18 century were property... and they were very limited.

Don't expect the original intent people to know this though.