Stand Up For Disenfranchised Voters!

[PoliticalChic]

I know our liberal colleagues will leap at the opportunity to stand up for voters whose wishes were ignored...

The nurses graduating from West Virginia University at Parkersburg were offered the opportunity to vote on whether or not an invocation and benediction would be offered, as was traditional at the ceremony.

"Students voted after being told that the majority would decide the issue,..."

"When WVU-Parkersburg nursing students voted 40 to 4 to include prayer in Thursday's pinning ceremony, university officials responded by banning prayer completely because the vote was not unanimous," the alliance said.

The Alliance Defense Fund contends no laws exist preventing the college from having the prayers as part of its ceremony.

Groups protest lack of prayer in ceremony - NewsandSentinel.com | News, Sports, Jobs, Community Information - Parkersburg News and Sentinel

Does this situation fit your idea of fair play?

Do we not see this as a regular occurrence in America today?

 

[Truthmatters]

They will be given a time of slience to pray their own prayers.

It includes everyone so no one is being denied the right to pray that day.

 

[PoliticalChic]

They will be given a time of slience to pray their own prayers.

It includes everyone so no one is being denied the right to pray that day.

But that isn't what 90% voted in favor of...nor what they were promised.


You aren't endorsing treating voting adults as children, are you?

 

[xotoxi]

I know our liberal colleagues will leap at the opportunity to stand up for voters whose wishes were ignored...

I am literally standing up as I type this...standing up for 10/11ths of the WVU-Parkersburg nursing student.

Go WVU-Parkersburg nursing students who want a prayer!!!

 

[California Girl]

They will be given a time of slience to pray their own prayers.

It includes everyone so no one is being denied the right to pray that day.

But that isn't what 90% voted in favor of...nor what they were promised.


You aren't endorsing treating voting adults as children, are you?

It's yet another example of ignoring the Will of the People. When this fits with the agenda of the left, they'll support the Will of the People. When it does not, they'll justify why they ignore it. I despise political correctness. I believe it stifles freedom.

 

[Truthmatters]

The University is not bound by the same laws as our elections

 

[kwc57]

Schools, like companies get to make and enforce their own rules.....regardless of how stoopid they might be. If they say it has to be unanimous rather than simple majority, that is their choice. It's chicken shit, but their choice.

 

[California Girl]

The University is not bound by the same laws as our elections

Your disingenuous attitude is not surprising. What about the ethics of it? Or do ethics not matter?

 

[California Girl]

Schools, like companies get to make and enforce their own rules.....regardless of how stoopid they might be. If they say it has to be unanimous rather than simple majority, that is their choice. It's chicken shit, but their choice.

But, when they held the vote, they said 'majority'. When the vote didn't go their way, they changed it. Legal, yea. Ethical? No. Do ethics no longer matter?

 

[Truthmatters]

This is not an election of our democracy.

This is basically a poll done by the university.

They have all legal rights to decide it as they please.

Where is your concern for the real elections in which the right has worked for decades to disenfranchise legal American voters?

 

[Truthmatters]

Caging (voter suppression) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


1980sIn 1981 and 1986 the Republican National Committee (RNC) sent out letters to predominately African-American neighborhoods. When tens of thousands of them were returned undeliverable, the party successfully challenged the voters and had them deleted from voting rolls. Due to the violation of the Voting Rights Act, the RNC was taken to court. Its officials entered a consent decree which prohibited the party from engaging in anti-fraud initiatives that targeted minorities or conducting mail campaigns to "compile voter challenge lists."[5]

[edit] 2004 US ElectionBBC journalist Greg Palast obtained an RNC document entitled "State Implementation Template III.doc" that described Republican election operations for caging plans in numerous states. The paragraph in the document pertaining to caging was:

 

[manifold]

My propensity to give a shit about these occurences is rapidly waning and almost gone.

I say 'almost' since obviously I gave enough of a shit to post about how little I give a shit.

 

[California Girl]

This is not an election of our democracy.

This is basically a poll done by the university.

They have all legal rights to decide it as they please.

Where is your concern for the real elections in which the right has worked for decades to disenfranchise legal American voters?

So, as I thought, because you agree with the outcome, you don't give a shit about the ethics. That's good to know.

 

[California Girl]

Caging (voter suppression) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


1980sIn 1981 and 1986 the Republican National Committee (RNC) sent out letters to predominately African-American neighborhoods. When tens of thousands of them were returned undeliverable, the party successfully challenged the voters and had them deleted from voting rolls. Due to the violation of the Voting Rights Act, the RNC was taken to court. Its officials entered a consent decree which prohibited the party from engaging in anti-fraud initiatives that targeted minorities or conducting mail campaigns to "compile voter challenge lists."[5]

[edit] 2004 US ElectionBBC journalist Greg Palast obtained an RNC document entitled "State Implementation Template III.doc" that described Republican election operations for caging plans in numerous states. The paragraph in the document pertaining to caging was:

Not only are you possibly dyslexic, you also appear to have ADD. The topic is not the GOP.... It's about the unethical behavior of a University. Try to focus.

 

[Truthmatters]

Its clearly about voting rights.

Im right on subject.

you just dont like where the real evidence takes the conversation

 

[Truthmatters]

Stand Up For Disenfranchised Voters!


Thats the tread title.

Im standing up for real disenfranchised voters.

Why do you not care about real voters?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The University is not bound by the same laws as our elections

Of course every analogy has gaps...I just wanted to be sure you were on the record opposing democracy.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Caging (voter suppression) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


1980sIn 1981 and 1986 the Republican National Committee (RNC) sent out letters to predominately African-American neighborhoods. When tens of thousands of them were returned undeliverable, the party successfully challenged the voters and had them deleted from voting rolls. Due to the violation of the Voting Rights Act, the RNC was taken to court. Its officials entered a consent decree which prohibited the party from engaging in anti-fraud initiatives that targeted minorities or conducting mail campaigns to "compile voter challenge lists."[5]

[edit] 2004 US ElectionBBC journalist Greg Palast obtained an RNC document entitled "State Implementation Template III.doc" that described Republican election operations for caging plans in numerous states. The paragraph in the document pertaining to caging was:

"When tens of thousands of them were returned undeliverable, the party successfully challenged the voters and had them deleted from voting rolls."

Another case of situational ethics by the left.
The article makes clear that this is a special case designed to make cerain that laws do not apply to protected groups, those endorsed by the left.
"...targeted minorities..."

More proof that the Democrat Party and the left...am I being redundant?...are opposed to equal protection before the law.

This is not a disparagement of you, Ms. Truthie, as you have openly established your disapproval of democracy.
I appreciate you standing up for your viewpoint.

 

[Truthmatters]

Funny how you fail to see that it was the republican party who did wrong here and the courts have recognised that fact.

The Republicans entered into a consent decree to keep it from going to court.

They ahve sought to have it vacated more than once and have been denied every time.

They keeping breaking the decree they signed themselves.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Funny how you fail to see that it was the republican party who did wrong here and the courts have recognised that fact.

The Republicans entered into a consent decree to keep it from going to court.

They ahve sought to have it vacated more than once and have been denied every time.

They keeping breaking the decree they signed themselves.

Here, Ms. Truthie, is the problem so many have: assumptions.

Always important to define terms and explain assumptions.

In your post you link to a document that freely admits that the perpetrators were the individuals who claimed to reside in locations in which they had no habitation.

The proof is the returned letters.

Your reliance on 'the court' as the the sole and absolute determinor of truth is false and easily proven so.

If it were so, then you would agree with the Taney Court in the Dred Scott Case.

So, clearly, the decision is one we agree to accept for that particular case. But it is open to explanation. In this case, the biased judge is finding for 'minorities' having the right to break the law.

Or would you argue that individuals should have the right to claim residence in multiple locations so as to cast multiple votes?

One opposed to democracy might just do so. Would that be you?

I hope that is not too nuanced for you.