Those who practice and promote aberrant behaviors (sodomy, abortion, adultery, charity by theft, extortion, and the like - all of which are inimical to civility and order) should be denied voting privileges until they repent (strictly in the sense of outward behavior, not in the sense of faith and contrition before the Creator). Aberrant behaviors are defined as those that intentionally disrupt, dishonor, and destroy civility, long life, courtesy, order, and the like.
In the past century we have greatly harmed ourselves by cheapening the vote and lowering the bar when it comes to participation in setting public policy. Only those who are able to articulate in writing and commit to practice the qualities of an informed, virtuous citizen should be granted voting privileges. They should also have incentives to make use of this privilege (for example free admittance to all national parks, reduced rates for other licenses such as hunting and fishing).
Any votes that advocate aberrant behavior ought to be declared null and void, with anyone proposing legislation to that effect also to be disqualified form office and/or voting. The same qualifications ought especially to be observed in regard to those who run for public office.
A rigorous examination should take place before one’s first vote, and a slightly less stringent examination every 4 years thereafter, just as it is for those who have driving, or flying privileges. The examination would most certainly undertake an assessment of knowledge regarding United States citizenship and history. Every citizen ought to be able to articulate the scientific truth of when life begins before they vote. It is not a philosophical or religious question, but highly pertinent to an informed, virtuous citizenry that desires peace and good order. There is a right and wrong answer, and the answer most certainly qualifies or disqualifies those who aim to participate in setting public policy.
Unless those who desire a civil society have already settled the question as to whether it is virtuous for mothers to kill their young before they are born, their efforts toward that end are in vain. It is foundational to the very concept of voting that the participants are interested in survival on the best terms possible among one another. The proponents of sodomy and abortion and the like have no such aim, but only self-interest. Hence, while co-existence may be possible for those who differ on same sex marriage, abortion, and such, it is not possible with all having the same privileges.
The vote should also be denied to those who desire benefits from the treasury without owning property, having a means of income, serving in the armed forces, being demonstrably active in assisting with charitable or community improvements, and paying taxes.
Retired and living off your private savings? No vote for you, and no taxation on your retirement income. Unable to take care of yourself for physical reasons? No vote for you and no votes on your behalf, except as those who have voting privileges are inclined to enact policies to your benefit. Unemployed, able bodied, and sitting at home? No vote for you and mandatory community service. You’ll be fed, clothed, and housed with care befitting a voting citizenry that has been tested and proven to be virtuous, law abiding, and genuinely interested in the general welfare.
Of course the primary qualification (one the purveyors of aberrant behaviors despise) is this: to be counted among the living.
We should also void by law any and all license to practice law and medicine to those who practice and promote aberrant behaviors. Authority to speak and teach aberrant behaviors must be granted in view of the 1st Amendment, but teachers and students of this kind simply ought not to be allowed to vote on matters affecting the general welfare.
I certainly do not expect wide acceptance of these standards. I expect rather to witness further the advocates of aberration receiving in their bodies the due reward for their efforts and behavior, and the people who wink at them also to suffer. Suffering on account of advocating wrong behaviors is common.
One important step toward your bold ideas is education.
Secondly, a requirement to mount the Ten Commandments near the main door of every classroom and government building. [Part of the ‘Under God Amendment’.]
I mean ‘REQUIRED’. The Ten Commandments are wildly popular BTW. I forget the poll, but it was heartening regardless.
And as for sodomites, they bit off more than they could chew with ‘gay marriage’. Now for the pendulum to swing the other way. [Ideas on that too.]
[Mark Levin's Men in Black has been very helpful.]
The Constitution needs to clarify the Commerce Clause, as a power to DE-regulate interstate trade.
And then any unconstitutional power that is actually popular, we would need to enumerate the proper way, such as dust-bowl protection, keeping current national parks, disarming felons, banning machine guns, and keeping current S.S. recipients from being abandoned [along with a gentle phase-out], etc.
“I certainly do not expect wide acceptance of these standards.”
Right, not at first. But what happens if every student in public schools is required to watch [Reagan economist] Milton Friedman’s “Free to Choose” series?
Another idea:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3222955/posts?page=19#19
Rather than take away a toy, offer the child another one.
So I strategize accordingly, not because the ‘childish’ element of voters deserve it, but because our VETERANS deserve us to be effective.
They've sacrificed too much for the ideals of freedom to sink into the muck of progressivism.