This is the last I’ll say on the issue, but punctuation is a critical element of grammar since it affects the meaning of a sentence–just as grammar itself does. It certainly is not spelling since it exists outside the words themselves (apostrophes and hyphens are, strictly speaking, elements of spelling, not punctuation).
Remember, nowadays, accusations/perceptions of racism are reflexive and bypass the cerebrum. ANYTHING that might work to the disadvantage of blacks, Hispanics, Albanian left-handed people, etc. is automatically construed to have been constructed specifically and solely for racist purposes. The people responding here certainly seem to think that I had a hidden racist agenda in my proposal.
My objection to the uninformed (not, the uneducated) being able to vote is based on my belief that voting is a responsibility as well as a right.
Good, since it’s nonsense.
I’m not following why someone must understand English at a particular level in order to vote. It seems to me in this day and age, a person could rely on the numerous non-English language news sources that are available in the U.S. and be well-informed on current events and the views of candidates.
Why would someone who gets their news from Univision or the Korean Times be presumed to be someone who can’t be trusted with a vote?
Cuz patriots speak 'Merican, dammit!
Because then we’d have to have ballots in Spanish or Korean and whaddaya think we are, communists?
I’d be out of luck.
I voted for the first time when I was in college. I studied everything, went to vote…and there was more stuff on there that I’d never HEARD of than what I did know anything about. Ditto with candidates.
I gave up.
Haven’t voted in a local election since; in fact, I’ve worked at the polling stations several times during presidential elections, and that’s the only time I’ve even voted for presidential candidates. I am a bad American.
It’s possible. But our laws are drafted in English. I doubt that all possible translations are vetted for accuracy.
I would argue this on broader grounds, that someone who hasn’t managed/bothered/succeeded in achieving eighth-grade English language competency has failed to complete a basic element of being/becoming a US citizen. I realize that it’s mean and cruel to say this, but it seems to me that learning the language of the country you are living in is a minimum investment in joining that country’s society. I would also note that the vast majority of immigrants can and do manage to learn English at a level of competency far greater than that which I postulated as a voting requirement.
As far as the native-born Americans who couldn’t pass this test, well, all but a very few could educate themselves to at least the eighth-grade level, and as far as those who truly can’t–another poster alluded to the question of whether the mentally ill should vote, which I won’t get into here.
There is no part of this paragraph that’s remotely correct.
You’re no longer allowed to vote.
Disagree? Well, my position as Official Voting Eligibility Tester is an elected position, and 100% of the people I’ve allowed to vote supported me in the last election, so clearly I’m doing a pretty good job.
(But seriously, grammar is a part of speech. Punctuation is a part of writing. They’re two separate things entirely.)
Multilingual ballots encourage people who “need” them to delay acquiring English skills, often indefinitely. Learning the language of the country you’ve chosen to move to seems to me to be a basic requirement for truly joining and participating in its society. Or to put it the opposite way, if you can’t be bothered to learn the language, you’re sending the message that you don’t really intend to do anything more than exist in your particular ethnic enclave. Note that expat Americans who do exactly that are scorned and reviled.
I don’t want this to turn into an immigration debate, though–I suppose there wouldn’t be any real objection to a translated version of the tests being available, since what I really care about is that the voter understands what he/she is voting on.
The entire history of the USA and other democratic nations has been towards expanding the franchise, not restricting it. Every exception to that has been a regrettable and shameful event. There’s no reason to try to change that trend. This is just another case of “Smart people agree with me, so they’re the only ones who should be allowed to vote.”
Do they have to pay taxes?
This is clearly an example of moderator-has-a-hard-on-for-me, since the statement that there is no such thing as written grammar is ludicrous and I don’t believe for a second that you actually think that.
You are trying to mock my position by saying that since there was a typo in my OP, I wouldn’t qualify for a voting test based on my own criteria. Obviously, typos notwithstanding, I can write, and presumably read, at the eighth-grade level. So can anyone else here, typos/spelling errors/grammar errors notwithstanding.
If you dislike what I’m saying, fine, but stupid, illogical snarkiness doesn’t constitute an argument.
California voter guide, complete with summaries and analysis of ballot propositions, all in Chinese. So your problem really isn’t the degree to which someone may be well-informed on current events, it truly is whether they are familiar with current events in English.
So, it isn’t that these sort of people are inferior or incompetent. It seems that you’re saying that they just aren’t “our sort of people,” because there are Americans and then there are Americans.
Another question: would the civics test include a question to exclude people who believe that the US is a Christian nation? Because that’s a pretty common belief, and it has no foundation in the Constitution or our laws.
Yep. You aren’t forbidden to vote, you just have to qualify to do so.
My presumption is that 99.9% of the population could educate themselves to the eighth-grade level. The remainder? No, in fact, I don’t want them to vote, any more than I want actual eighth-graders to do so. Mean, I know.:rolleyes:
Would you allow me to be the final authority for designing the test? Do you think I can’t construct one that will exclude you as a voter? Why would you want to give that power to anyone?
A distinction without a difference. A person who flunks his driver’s test is forbidden to drive.
So, will those people who are blocked from voting also be excused from paying taxes and all other expenses of our society?
As a prior military person, I find the proposal of the original post repugnant. My father quit school in 6th grade to support his mother when his father died. He probably couldn’t pass the 8th grade stuff, but he sure as heck deserved to vote.
As someone has posted above, once you start licensing people to have kids (and enforcing it), then maybe we can talk about taking away other rights from American citizens.
You have actually zero idea what it’s like to be an immigrant who doesn’t speak English. No one doesn’t speak English because they are too lazy or because they need encouragement to learn English. They learn English at the rate and to the extent they are able to and they learn it to the extent that needing to know English is actually important to their daily lives.
Well, gee—I do favor allowing only Americans to vote in American elections. Swat my behind with a melon rind. You are making the same silly assumption, though, that others have–that I have a racist and non-inclusive point of view. I do not differentiate between native and non-native Americans. If you qualify to be a citizen (WHICH REQUIRES THE PASSAGE OF A WRITTEN TEST, BY THE WAY), you are equal to someone who was born here. No distinction.
I advocate voter qualification tests for everyone, in point of fact.
And I don’t know why you would bring up the religion question except that you probably think I am a Bible-thumping Republican because I seemingly hate immigrants or something. That’s a sad consequence of the political polarization of this counrty–take up a given position and people will label you as belonging to the camp that is associated with it. Obviously, religion has no place in politics, citizenship, or this discussion.