Separation of Church and State

[Ghost of a Rider]

I disagree. Had a shown an article with only black people sharing their reasons would you be naive enough to believe their situation is racially unique?

If it was not about race then what was your point, other than that black elderly people have just as difficult a time acquiring IDs as white elderly people?

I understand how it works where you live. That isn't in contention. My point is I don't believe showing an ID makes any appreciable difference.

I think it does.

How can you claim that? Trump has been on his "I was cheated" rampage for months. An attempted insurrection occurred at the capital based primarily on the fact that Trump and his cadre of psychophants have lied about the election. 30 percent of Americans think the election was stolen. It is literally killing our democratic process and you claim their is no harm? Unreal.

I didn't claim there was no harm, I said the integrity of an election is not affected by a person's doubts about it. Either the integrity of an election is sound or it is not. In other words, the election was conducted and transpired in an ethical and legal manner or it was not.

Would you not say that the integrity of the last election was sound, in spite of Trump's doubts? Democrats have been trying to prove just that for the last two years.

Because if you can't prove the fraud exists and can't prove IDs would stop it at any appreciable level, then the government has no right to create laws combatting it. As I pointed out, the fed could make laws based on anything if this were true because they could just make a claim and not to prove it and people like you would trust them and jump on board evidently.

1.) Fraud has been proven to exist and you said so yourself. Now you're saying "...if you can't prove the fraud exists...". You're contradicting yourself.

2.) There's no way to prove ID would "stop it at any appreciable level" and was never touted as such. It is simply an added layer of security to help deter voter fraud.

Of course voter fraud will happen anyway. But if we don't implement voter ID just because fraud will happen anyway, then why have laws against murder?

Yes. It is exists. It has always existed. It will always exist in the future even if everyone gets IDs.

And murder will continue even with laws against it.

The point is why force 150 million people to get IDs to stop a tiny fraction of the fraud?

Why doesn't this 150 million not have IDs already? Are you suggesting that a third of the country can't buy alcohol and cigarettes or get married or travel by plane or drive or buy a car?

And why force people to get IDs when again; the loser will just claim the IDs are fake.

If the loser claims the IDs are fake then the burden is on him/her to prove it. Simple as that.

I mean really, have you not been paying attention? Claiming election fraud is not some isolated Republican party talking point, it is now a feature.

And claiming the Republican party is peopled mostly by uneducated racists is a Democrat feature.

Of course their is, just not enough for it to matter on any appreciable level.

In your opinion.

This country was founded on the principle of One Man, One Vote, i.e., the right to vote and the individual vote is sacrosanct above all else. I for one am furious at the very idea of some asswipe nullifying my vote by committing fraud. If requiring IDs can help deter that to some degree then I'm all for it.

If you're okay with some fuckwad nullifying your vote then you clearly do not understand the significance of the right to vote.

So would planting computer chips in our hands. That would make fraud super hard. You want to do that?

That's a stupid question.

I would hope not because it certainly wouldn't stop all fraud.

That's what I just said.

Again, many people don't have IDs.

Then how do they do anything that requires ID now?

False equivalences.

How so? Are we not required already to present ID for many things?

He has lied. It was proven he knew things were being made up. That is why he told Barr (loosely quoting) to just claim the election was fraudulent and let my supporters in Congress handle the rest.

He knew it was bullshit.

I'm not buying that one.

I disagree. Asking a foreign president to "just announce" you are investigating Biden is a disgrace. You can pretend he was just wanting justice but a small bit of logic in the back of your head has to know he was trying to damage Biden's election bid.

So what if he was? What the fuck do you think the second impeachment was about? They were bound and determined to get Trump out of office and that included an impeachment that would prevent him from running again. That was the only purpose of the second impeachment.

Certainly fermenting an insurection is an impeachable offense right? He lied about the election fraud, had his people gathered in DC, new some were armed and sent them to the Capital. He is essentially a traitor to his own office.

Wrong.

1.) Trump did not foment (not ferment, btw) an insurrection. I watched the video of his rally that day and not once did he say anything that could be construed as incitement.

He used terms like "fight" and this is what Democrats glommed onto to fuel their insurrection narrative. Problem is, this is a term used as a rhetorical tool or metaphor by everyone every day. Doesn't mean shit. But what they conveniently overlook or ignore is the fact that at one point in the rally he asked them to march to the Capital and "peacefully and patriotically" let their voices be heard.

2.) No one at the Capital was armed. This is patently false. The only people who were armed were the police and the only person shot was a protester.

"Assuming" voter fraud is anti American.

No, it's not.

Most people don't remember this but right after it was announced that Trump won in 2016, Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters were preparing to address the House and both of them were clearly flustered. Someone said something or asked a question and Waters responded to the effect there may have been election fraud.

Democrats, the MSM, celebrities, social media and liberal news outlets had been declaring for months with supreme confidence that Trump would not be president. In their heart of hearts, they fucking KNEW it. And yet...

2016 came as a complete shock to these people (I still chuckle at the video of the woman screaming) and they simply did not know how to proceed. Working with a president they viscerally hated was out of the question. So they spent four years fighting him at every turn, even when he proposed beneficial common sense policies.

I say all this to point out that, though there is a lot to not like about Trump and criticize him for, Democrat behavior was atrocious during this time. They acted like spoiled children having a temper tantrum. Look what they did to Nick Sandmann.

Impeachments are not a reason to assume and perpetuate false fraud.

Didn't say they were. And the impeachments were not the only reason he thought the election was stolen.

Yes they were.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.

Email investigations, Benghazi investigations x8, fast and furious investigation, IRS investigation, "our biggest priority is to make Obama a one term president", more email investigations, birth certificates, Muslim claims, Clinton foundation, tan suits, Dijon mustard, jade helm, murder count list, pizza basements, pedos, groomers, etc etc...a constant campaign of investigations, personal attacks and conspiracy theories.

So, Democrats just followed suit and did what Republicans did?

Not to be rude, but all I have to say is wahh fucking wahh. Trump is abrasive. He attacks and insults everyone whom he doesn't like. This pisses people off and they attack back. Presidents need to have thick skins, not thin skinned emotional children who attacks our institutions to extract revenge.

Like I said, if it had stopped with Trump, that would be one thing. But Democrat politicians and voters along with celebrities, liberal news and the MSM went after Trump supporters. And even after Trump left office, it didn't end there. Now, the narrative has evolved to include the entire Republican party, labeling us all racist.

He gave a speech and called out election deniers and domestic terrorists. He emphasized no political violence is acceptable.

Irrelevant. I didn't say Biden encouraged violence and I never implied he did, I said he campaigned on the promise to unite the country but all he's done is criticize and demean the Republican party and its voters.

If you are an election denier and or a domestic terrorist then too freaking bad. You deserve to be called out.

There's no law saying one can't be an election denier. We are perfectly free to express any opinion we like without being scolded by the president.

Trump behaved badly. He called people names constantly, accused people of crimes that didn't happen, and sold out our own government on the global stage.

So they both behaved badly. Can we at least agree on that?

I have much less concern that Trump or someone like him will declare IDs used to buy alcohol are fake.

Irrelevant. The principle of not requiring ID to vote just because some might be fake is stupid and illogical.

Because by and large Trump supporters will buy any election fraud story they are provided, regardless of how rediculous. Bamboo threads anyone?

Trump supporters and Republicans are the ones advocating for IDs to vote.

They got caught being the key phrase.

This is a non sequitur. It does not follow that just because they were caught that IDs would not further serve to deter fraud.

Do you know if they had IDs?

From the article:

"...falsely claiming U.S. citizenship or making false statements on voter registration application, and with misdemeanor charges of unlawfully casting ballots in the 2016 presidential election."

It doesn't say whether they had IDs or not. But I will say that if you think requiring ID to vote won't stop voter fraud then, given that these people registered with false information, why bother having people register to vote?

I know what you'll say: that they were caught. But what you don't know is that others won't be caught through voter ID.

I have to repeat here what I mentioned earlier and that is that the right to vote and an individual's vote is sacrosanct. When people say that fraud doesn't happen on a wide enough scale to require ID to vote or other measures, these same people are oblivious to just how precious their one vote is.

Democrats seem to have a cavalier attitude when it comes to the importance of the individual vote. Because of the fraud committed by those illegals, nineteen legally registered people had their votes nullified. Yet the attitude of a lot of liberals is that it's no big deal if it's not on a wide scale.

Fuck that.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

If we truly believe in Separation of Church and State why de we allow so called reverends to run for office. Seems to be this should bar any clergyman be it a minister, priest or rabbi from holding office.

Walker lost. But I'm sure he'll get 'em next time.

 

[lennypartiv]

Walker lost. But I'm sure he'll get 'em next time.

They need to pick a better candidate next time.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

They need to pick a better candidate next time.

No shit?

 

[Blaster]

Constitutional Myth #4: The Constitution Doesn't Separate Church and State

America's Founding Fathers may not have included the phrase, but the history is clear—they never wanted a Christian nation

www.theatlantic.com