Should able-bodied citizens who REFUSE to work yet live off of tax-payers be granted the PRIVILEGE to vote?

Last I knew voting was a right, if not an obligation - for the privilege of citizenship.

If they are the lazy ones that make a living off of welfare, they should be kicked off welfare and yes should not be allowed to vote. If you refuse to try and help yourself then you should be refused all the rights of being a citizen. I'm not talking about the people that collect welfare but are actually trying to help themselves or the ones that cannot work, only the ones that refuse to work but are able to.

OK that was mean of me.

I sometime feel that people should have to earn the right to be a US citizen and vote. I also think the voting age should be put back at 21 unless you have earned it before that age...say military service.

As long as they are a citizen and of legal age they should be allowed to vote. This is a slippery slope we do not want to travel. It is a constitutional right that many (women and African Americans) have fought hard to obtain.

Here is what I have found.
Most of those lazy people who sit on there asses and collect the government money don't vote. It is those who want to given and keep giving that vote to make sure those who don't do for themselves get to live free.

More able working American's who don't want to support those who will not help themselves don't vote because they feel like their vote will not count. This idea it pushed down their throat from the liberal media everyday.

I would like to see every American get out there and place their legal single vote. For those groups like Acorn who signed up Mickey Mouse and the Dallas Cowboys to vote in Colorado. They should be placed on trail for the very thing they had attempted to do. Treason.

Let's suppose those who refuse to work can't vote. Then that's what lots of conservatives don't want; big gov. It takes a lot of workers, phones, cars, computers, IT staff, & office space to figure out who is doing what & why.
Voting for registered voters is the law & it should remain as such.

Yes, I think so. I think you're going about it wrong. There is a right to vote, so I don't think that should be taken away. You should change the requirement to get unemployment though. Offer free courses (so they get new qualifications) for the longterm unemployed and only give them their welfare money if either they can prove they can't work (disability, have a young child, etc) or they can prove they applied for 50 jobs that week.

On a side note, I'm glad you have me unblocked. I thought you did but you obviously don't :)

Bad to deny anyone the right to vote it's guranteed in the constitution. Very dangerous territory.

While I want to give you a huge high five because i agree, I have to be intellectually honest. The constitution guarantees CITIZENS the right to vote, so i have to go with what is written and established.

Now if an amendment is pushed for and approved, then high fives all the way around.

And there is a lot of them.

TommyG said it PERFECTLY!!! ALL (LEGAL) U.S. CITIZENS should NEVER be refused their right to vote!!!

IF we should EVER get to the point that we start refusing (LEGAL) U.S. citizens the right to vote, regardless of the reasons, we will have finally destroyed everything this nation stood for.

I definitely agree in principle, although I shudder to contemplate the amount of paperwork and red tape that would be involved in enforcing it.

Sounds like somebody is obsessed with you, has to copy you AND lie about you!

You noticed that too?

So only certain Americans should be allowed to vote?

I don't think we should revoke the voting rights of those who can prove that they are U.S. citizens; that could easily lead to more drama than we'd care to deal with.

If we stop enabling these leaches by giving them endless food stamps, free this, that, and the other, they will no longer be able to "live off the fat of the land" and will be forced to get off their bottoms and work for their food, etc.

I'm all for HELPING, not carrying, those who are honestly poor, such as single moms who are unable to obtain a job that will pay them enough to care for several children...and even that would have to be carefully thought through.

I am also for helping the disabled (especially military), but "disabled" would have to be clearly defined: There are those who have impairments but CAN work.

I strongly disagree, however, with our present system of enabling that produces laziness, irresponsibility, and is choking with fraud. I think all of our "freebie" programs desperately need to be thought through and revamped. Otherwise, we will simply continue to waste untold amounts of money and promote negative behavior patterns that last, in some cases, for generations.

Withholding the right to vote? No. Somewhere along the line, that will turn and kick us in the fanny...hard.

If it can be proven that a citizen is purposely milking the system, NO they should not be allowed to vote.... Those collecting entitlements should have to prove they are attempting to find a job and/or proof of their wages.

Voting is not a privilege but a RIGHT, guaranteed by our Constitution. Unless the person is a convicted felon, they have an obligation to use their right to vote. ~ P.S. ~ Try telling my GC friend that unemployment is paid by taxpayers. I don't think you'd get very far with that one; he has the records of how much he has personally had to pay as an employer for the past 35 years.

Edit: Wow. Doesn't take much to get blocked around here, huh? Since I can no longer post or respond I will bid you all a good weekend.

Rights come from God.

The original thought was that only land owners should vote, because only land owners paid taxes, (of course now we have far more forms of taxation). In other words only people with skin in the game should get the larger say in how their money is spent.

We have made buying votes far too easy. Maybe only those who contribute should vote. Instead of creating more and more hand outs, to cheats who do not need them, they may actually find ways to operate more efficiently. Charity may actually go to those in need, because those who contribute could and would hold the government accountable. (Which is also the reason to do charity/safety nets on a more local level rather than Federal or State. It makes catching the waste and fraud far easier.)

Please don't hate on me. Just a thought, and probably not one anyone could do now that we have gone so far down the road of dependency.

Taking away someone's right to vote would be the most unpatriotic and the most un-American thing I could ever think of.

"[it is of] great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of it's rulers, but to guard one part of society against the injustice of another part." -James Madison, The Federalist Papers

He definitely meant people who would like to strip others of their rights, voting isn't a privilege it's a RIGHT and a RESPONSIBILITY. It is a civic duty like serving on a jury or being a member of your state's National Guard.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." -Abraham Lincoln

Great idea, Marie !
If you are on the dole- NO VOTE !

Who is to say all those unemployed are bloodsuckers? Sorry but we aren't a Socialist country. Even Bolivia tried that crap to let only those in the city vote yet wouldn't let the farmers vote. The unemployed and not being able to find a job and that happens to many that are older and way over qualified have more than earned their way in this country. First of all they worked in the first place or they wouldn't be considered unemployed and able to collect unemployment. 2nd of all the employers paid into those accounts for that employee to collect unemployment in the first place so it's not the Governments money. If the government took all the money that's collected from Unemployment taxes and kept their blood sucking hands off of it then the account goes down but not empty especially at 9% unemployment as you have the other 90% of working people still paying into Unemployment.

Hula Girl, I'm not talking about those that are actively looking for jobs. If they are actively looking for jobs then they're not refusing to work.

Who's to say they aren't looking for work. I know many that have been on unemployment for awhile but way over qualified but to think they are less of a person and not able to vote puts them in the same classification as a criminal and that's wrong. Just because someone is out of work doesn't make them less of a person. If they are collecting unemployment shows they were working and their employer paid into the system and allowed them to collect the very money their employers paid in. It's not the governments money...it's the employers money that paid into the system all those years.

Again, I'm talking about the dead beats. And there are ways to tell if people are looking for a job. I'm not talking about people who have fallen into dire straights and need the help. I'm talking about the ones who live on it for generations.

Then go after all those on welfare and all those homeless that still choose to be homeless. There are many that worked but they are not working now. Voting isn't a privilege to be taken away except for criminal activity and a person on unemployment is not a criminal and who's to judge what's really going on. As I stated if they are getting unemployment their employer is the one that paid in to the system.

You need to read all of the posts on here, Hula Girl. I posted this the way I did to get people over here. Those who actually know me could finish where I was going with this. It's about the benefits. And let's not forget that the people I'm talking about ARE criminals in that they are stealing from people.

Outstanding response! I must admit that I don't always agree with you, Hula Girl, but I do respect your opinions. After reading this, my respect for you has risen quite a bit. I believe you are completely correct on this subject and thank you for speaking on the matter. It is just wrong on so many levels to consider not allowing people to use their right to vote that I don't even know where to begin. You have said it quite well in your posts here. Thank you!

Let them vote....Eventually whoever they vote for will go down the tube like Obama.

if they are able bodied and can find a job but refuse to take it, why should they be allowed to vote... of course they will be allowed too but what one is allowed to do and what is right very seldom are on the same page

and whom are you to say ... weather a person is able bodied or not ... whom or what makes you such a great over seer

a person knows if they are able bodied or not to work, if they have no health issues that keep them from working they are able bodied, duh, now that wasn't so hard was it ... but then you are a lib so it might be a bit hard for you to comprehend, but hey if you need me to explain it for you in depth let me know.... I will type slower the next time
even handicap people work, so even some of those who claim they can't work probably could

Whom would be the judge .. to say weather they were refusing to work ... or just could not find work ... ... or better even can't find work that would take care of their family ... just all those part time minimum wage jobs.. Texas created ...

Are they going to job interviews? Are they handing out resumes? Are they filling out applications? There are ways.

I don't like the thought of any more government power as it is, let alone in deciding who can vote and who can't. As long as you're a legal American citizen who is not a convicted felon then it is your right to vote, lazy or not.

they should be able to vote,



maybe we should only let people who have property vote

As much of a problem as I have with idiots voting, its their right.

Voting in this country as a law-abiding citizen is a right, not a privilege. Even if they're lazy bums who I'd sooner smack than look at. Although right now, I can honestly say that there are more able-bodied citizens who are desperately looking for work than those who are mooching off.

Those who mooch off and refuse to work should simply be cut off. It's that simple. If we don't have a system in place to distinguish moochers, then we need one.

What you're suggesting is a slippery slope. Suffrage rights in this country are just that-- rights. Even duty, to some. Making cases for refusing to allow certain people to vote (barring a stint in prison, and even then, I'm pretty sure they're allowed to vote once they're out) is the next step to just taking away peoples' rights and allowing corporations to find ways to exploit that for political power and gain, too.

I don't know one person who has refused to work. Maybe the author does.

But to not allow US citizens to vote, when they're guaranteed by the US Constitution, smacks of Nazism. Being out of work is no reason to take away anyone's voting rights, even if they're out of work for an extended period of time.