ALL citizens should have a voice. And ALL voices should be equal.
this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
152 points (98.7% liked)
News
23301 readers
3502 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Ah yes the good ol "Voicing disagreement to our inhumane behavior is illegal" and "If you do illegal things we take away your voting rights" combo.
Olibigatory Sherman.
All adult citizens should get to vote every election.
If we have so many citizens in prison that their voting block swings an election or pushes through a referendum, then it most definitely means we have too many people unjustly held in prison.
If you’ve served your complete sentence for a non-violent crime, you should get your voting rights back, unless said crime was related to voting. Likewise, if you are convicted of a violent crime involving a firearm, you should forfeit your second amendment rights for life.
I'd be interested in hearing a compelling reason why anyone should have their voting rights revoked for any reason what so ever.
If you're a citizen of a country, you should always get a say, no matter what you've done.
Doing otherwise just opens the doors for something like making weed illegal so you can throw hippies in prison on felony charges.
I would argue committing voter fraud or election fraud is grounds for stripping away one’s voting rights. The person has proven they do not value other people’s voting rights by trying to subvert otherwise fair elections and should therefore forfeit their own voting rights. That’s really the only reason voting rights should ever be stripped though.
There won't ever be enough people convicted of election-related fraud to matter, so all you'd be doing by taking away their right to vote is to reinforce the idea that the right to vote can be taken away.
Just because the number of offenders is negligible doesn’t mean they should continue to exercise that right after they’ve abused that same right to the detriment of others.
I don't agree with this stance, but I believe the idea is that people who vote should be those who have a vested interest in the preservation of social order and the governments that ensure it.
Prisoners are kept imprisoned by the government, which means on the whole you'd expect their priorities to trend towards the dissolution of governmental social order.
You've also got voter jurisdiction conflicts. Should prisoners have a say in local elections where the prison is housed or should it be their last known residence before they were incarcerated? If the prison population is significant compared to the population of a remote town where the prison may be housed, do we say they don't get a say in local elections after all?
I'd say before any of these problems can be easily answered, it requires a huge overhaul of the justice system and the way we handle imprisonment as a whole.
Prisoners, who are entirely at the mercy of the state, have more vested interest than anyone else in ensuring that their needs are heard.
Voting for the government to dissolve will never be on the ballot, and even if it was, I'd argue that if a government is keeping enough prisoners that they could vote to dissolve it, that government is the most extreme police state in history and it definitely needs to be dissolved.
This will end at the Supreme Court.
Easy guess how they'll rule lol