Replies

I suggest you get a dictionary and learn what a "strawman" argument is, then learn what a legitimately drawn analogy is. It is obvious that you don't know the difference...but of course if you did, then you would also know the difference between a privelege and a right.

Driving is a privelege. The state mandates that you take lessons, prove that you have taken those lessons, pass a written test, pass a driving test, pass a vision test and then that you purchase not just a license to drive, but that you also purchase a license for your automobile, which must pass a vehicle inspection before it can be driven on the "publicly funded" roads.

Voting is a right. The state cannot place any restrictions on that right, no test, no license, no fees, no restrictions of any kind, beyond being a law abiding citizen of legal age.

Now run to your dictionary, little one, and learn your definitions.

Driving is a privelege. ... Voting is a right.

Hmm... Not quite.

Actually, the Constitution does not guarantee the right to vote. And the law more or less treats driving and voting about the same way.

Both are only available to those above a certain age. Both can be lost by due process of law.

Voting used to be reserved for white adult male land owners. Legally.

Personally, I'd say both a driver's license and the power to vote are both priveleges. The country would benefit greatly from both being more restricted too.

Driving is clearly a right and individuals have no right to vote for the person seeking the office of President of the U.S.

Visit your dictionary, history and law books, little one.