Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MortMan

Yes. If a marriage fails, the man can no longer vote.

That’s not a bug; it’s a feature.

It’s not “penalizing” him. It’s maintaining the principle that government should be in the hands of people who are successful adults with an investment in the future. I.e., married men living with their children. No shack-ups. No welfare “moms.” No transient men living off women’s welfare checks.

The point of my proposal is that the basic unit of society is the functional family, not the failed family, and not the atomized individual.


50 posted on 10/21/2014 5:44:52 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]


To: Arthur McGowan

You would disenfranchise half the military? I think not!

More than on few young serviceman has lost a marriage— it’s hard being a military wife and damned near impossible when you’re young, stupid and your new spouse (who never left home before)is now 3000 miles from home and you’re deployed again...


56 posted on 10/21/2014 7:12:40 PM PDT by antidisestablishment (When the passion of your convictions surpass those of your leader, it's past time for a change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

To: Arthur McGowan

I’m not sure how to rationalize the removal of the ability to vote based on what could be *entirely* another person’s decision isn’t a penalty.

Needless to say, we disagree.

Have a great day, FRiend.


60 posted on 10/21/2014 11:20:20 PM PDT by MortMan (All those in favor of gun control raise both hands!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson