You have not refuted anything that I said in posts # 20 and 21.
If the law was written in such a way as to allow injustice, it should be re-written so as not to allow it, but, especially in these dangereous times, when international terrorists have declared war on the United States, when the U.S. has been flooded with illegal immigrants, when the veracity of the "Mainstream Newsmedia" cannot be trusted, and corruption is rife in the Democrat Party, a law such as this, to protect the sanctity of the vote, is very much needed.
Refute this:
"Considering the importance of the vote to a republic, protection of its sanctity by careful assurance of the right of an individual to vote could not be more important--both to protect the right of a citizen to vote and to prevent illegal voting."
The protection of the sanctity of the vote is the reason the law was written--not as you allege, to establish a deterrent to citizens' voting or to disenfranchise any legal voter.
Your argument is patently absurd. Similar arguments were made in the courts and dismissed (laughed out of the court would be more accurate). There is no evidence of any significant voter fraud. And the idea that terrorists could undermine our elections by slipping into a voting booth is laughable. They would have to be tens of thousands to have an impact on anything other then local elections. I would rather suggest that it is you who have ignored all of the points I made in my post. Even if your arguments held water (which they do not) there is no getting around the 24th amendment. Its language is crystal clear. You CAN NOT CHARGE for the right to vote. The law was constitutionally a dead letter from the word go. I am not against IDs. Thats a great idea. But they have to be available to people in reality and not just theory and you can not charge for them. Not one dime.