Not only do democratic governments seem warranted in prohibiting conduct that threatens their effective and appropriate functioning, a plausible case can be made that those guilty of Disfranchisement of felons pro and con crimes are prime candidates for disenfranchisement.
Also there are millions of people who choose not to vote, but just because they don't share their voice doesn't mean they don't have rights. This point is key because it takes away his 2nd and 3rd contention. Women, African Americans, and the poor have had their political rights denied in order to maintain the status quo.
We have punishment it is called prison. The social contract my opponent describes in the sentences above this quote does not call for disenfranchisement it calls for punishment.
Government is supposed to determine laws that will best benefit society.
We therefore cannot be sure that the decisions we make today will be correct tomorrow, and even the decisions that appear most sound at the time may appear less justifiable in light of later evidence.
This point is key because it takes away his 2nd and 3rd contention. He says my criterion is only doing what the people want Social contract describes is a set of agreements by which people form nations and maintain a social order.
This is true with felons also. After felons are released from jail they cannot carry guns for obvious reasons. In mid-July, the state threw the list out. I win on my side of the case because i defended all of my contentions, and my opponent never responded to my underview.
Now I offer this following under view: Leaving out a segment of the population after they have repaid their debts is unfair. Also, taking away the felons' right to vote while they're in prison is not restricting any of their "human rights".
Greenfeld and Maureen A. This sounds good but is not logical. This is where justice is served this is where felons pay their debt to society. He fails to understand that felons still are citizens. Nonetheless, he says, the voting-rights issue "seems like a golden opportunity for [Democrats] and they should jump on it.
So you can reject my opponents entire case because his value is not relevant to this debate.
Shortly thereafter a broad range of economic and political reforms were instituted. Report this Argument Con Because the interests of felons does not truly represent the interests of the wider population I urge a negative ballot.
Disenfranchisement takes away felons right to vote on issues regarding felons. Disenfranchised groups are seen as sub-citizens, and enfranchisement helps gain status as equals.
Kerry has been low-key on the issue. Thus, we cannot establish the resolution as something that democracies universally ought to do. First, in politics as in much of practical life, decision-making processes and the human understanding upon which they depend are imperfect. Other states, like Ohio, are more lenient, but bureaucratic confusion sometimes keeps former prisoners from the polls, activists say.
For example, we don't allow felons to carry fire arms. Many believe a majority of felons are disfranchised because they are black or from other minorities. I was simply saying that voting is not a human right, it is clearly a political right because you can only vote if you have a government.
The poor were first to gain the right to vote under President Jackson. The United States inherited parts of the English legal system including disenfranchisement of criminals because of its efficiency of decreased the crime rate. My opponent makes no connection to not letting them vote in prison and not having human rights.
In general, regulating which eligible voters are allowed to cast ballots seems undemocratic. We cannot embrace static conclusions about what we ought do in a democracy. If the majority voted to disenfranchise a racial minority group we would have to do it.
Equality- rights, treatment, quantity, or value equal to all others in a specific group- full equality under the law:: African Americans and Women were long seen as sub-human in United States history. I am not saying that whatever the people vote for should be done The citizens have chosen laws that they believe will best benefit themselves and others, but the felons blantantly disregarded these laws showing that they don't care about the general welfare.In Florida, ex-felons are prevented from voting after the completion of their sentence until they go through a lengthy and in some cases impossible process of rights restoration.
Disfranchisement of Felons Pro and Con As we head towards the twenty-first century, we find that America has left segregation as a part of the past and has focused to promote equal opportunity.
Though times have changed, million convicted felons in twenty states are being denied the right to vote (Elizabeth S. Clemens, Elizabeth Hull.
Because felon disenfranchisement creates inequality by restricting voting and making felons inferior to regular citizens, human rights are minimized. In order for human rights to be satisfied equality must be established.
Felons must have the same opportunity to vote and have an equal chance to gain human rights. The Sentencing Project files Amicus Brief in Florida Felony Disenfranchisement Suit Our amicus brief highlights the punitive and arbitrary nature of Florida's voting rights restoration process, and argues that disenfranchisement is counterproductive to effective reentry.
Disfranchisement of felons Pro and Con Essays: OverDisfranchisement of felons Pro and Con Essays, Disfranchisement of felons Pro and Con Term Papers, Disfranchisement of felons Pro and Con Research Paper, Book Reports.
ESSAYS, term and research papers available for UNLIMITED access. CORE QUESTION Felon, Felony, & Disenfranchisement Defined Felon Population Statistics Elections & Politics Race US Constitution Voting Rights Act Federal & State Law International Law Philosophical Questions Policy-Oriented Questions ; School Vouchers - Top 4 Pros and Cons.Download