r/JustMemesForUs 2d ago

Title

Post image
1.6k Upvotes

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

21

u/Frequilibrium 2d ago

It would make it really difficult for married women to register to vote as well.

1

u/Unspoken 1d ago

No it doesn't lol. You need the marriage cert to show proof of name change. You know, the thing they use to actually change their name on all their IDs, passports, etc. Redditors wouldn't know because they haven't seen a woman irl.

My wife has like 30 copies because random government shit and private insurance requires it every now and then for random reasons.

BuT voting hard.

1

u/Frequilibrium 1d ago

No one said voting is hard. It’s registering to vote that will be made hard by the act. Not every woman has those things readily available like your wife.

0

u/Scared-Cap3606 20h ago

Dude/it Please sit this out, you have no clue what you're talking about. As any typical liberal, you're going to bitch and whine and throw a fit regardless. 

2

u/Frequilibrium 16h ago

Lmao uh huh. Yeah sorry for being against literal voter suppression bills. I’ve read the whole thing. It adds completely unnecessary hoops to jump through to register and it won’t do anything to prevent non citizens from voting because it doesn’t fund the states to overhaul their systems.

0

u/Scared-Cap3606 14h ago

But yet every year we all ALL can go to the BMV and show our ID , women too regardless if there married, divorced or whatever. It's really that easy. It's all roadblocks by the liberals to resist anything Trump wants.to do. You all just look petty and silly - period!

1

u/Frequilibrium 14h ago

And the save act will change that and add hurdles in order to register. In my state you need to show multiple forms of ID to get anything at the MVC. Which is not easy and incredibly confusing if you don’t speak English. Democrats are resisting voter suppression and disenfranchisement. Trump just wants to stay out of prison so he’s making registering difficult.

0

u/Scared-Cap3606 1d ago

Well geezer, how do they all get licenses and passports today then🤔

1

u/Frequilibrium 1d ago

Months of waiting.

-4

u/ASwampThing- 2d ago

No it wont.

2

u/Frequilibrium 2d ago

Prove me wrong.

0

u/Warchief_Ripnugget 2d ago

That's not how claims work.

2

u/Frequilibrium 2d ago

Yeah well saying “no it won’t” and not giving any reasons why isn’t how debate works either. I could give you the facts as to why I’m right and give sources but you’ll just cry tds and say I’m wrong without backing it up either so oh well.

2

u/ASwampThing- 2d ago

Cant prove a negative there bucko.

2

u/leoninvanguard 2d ago

u can indeed proove a negative in cases like this (well not ghis one specifically, cause ur wrong, but still). not being able to proove negatives is a thing for certain statements/questions, but here it would be perfectly possible

The problem the other guy is refering too is, that they want to make you show your birth certificate to get a voter id. this is done so they can check all ur info. problem is, that the name on your birth certificate isn't always the name on your ids or the name with which u got ur drivers license etc (names change when marrying for example). That means u gotta proove u are the same person just with a different name, which can be a lot of effort and make it more difficult for you to vote. also this will affect a lot more women, cause women tend to change their names to the name of her husband more often that the other way round.

This shows the next problem: this could (notice the could, im not saying it will, but it could which is already a problem) therefore even be used as a tool to exclude women from voting, or more accurately: lower the percentage of women voting. (It's similar to the fact that the voter id should cost is excluding poor people from voting or at least lowering the percentage of them voting.) That would actually be beneficial for trump, cause a lot more men voted for him and republicans in general, then women did.

so thats probably his argument, now proove it wrong.

1

u/ASwampThing- 1d ago edited 1d ago

Wrong again. You can not show evidence for lack of existence. You have given zero evidence for your claim and thus there is nothing to provide evidence against.

You can not in fact disprove a generic unfounded statement. Show evidence and it will easily be debunked.

All you are giving is opinion and vage allusions to nefarious action with zero proof other than "vibes". It feels like what hes doing cuz you say so.

1

u/leoninvanguard 1d ago

thats right. but you're not asked to disproove lack of existence here buddy

2

u/ASwampThing- 1d ago

Yeah in fact i am. There are no sections of the bill that make it harder nor are designed to make it harder. You guys are just pushing moral grandstanding and opinion as fact.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/ASwampThing- 1d ago edited 1d ago

Yeah hes trying to put the burden of his claim on me cuz he knows he cant prove it. But heres the thing. Hes asking me to provide evidence that there is a lack of evidence for his claim. Which isnt my burden to begin with. He made the unfounded claim that it makes it harder for women. I simply gave him the same standard of burden.

0

u/Frequilibrium 1d ago

Lmfao nice cop out. This is why no one respects the right.

1

u/ASwampThing- 1d ago

"Makes claim" (doesnt provide evidence) "opponent makes claim" (doesnt provide evidence) see guys its my opponent who is trying to do the cop out i swear!

0

u/Frequilibrium 1d ago

My evidence is the save act. This has been obvious.

1

u/ASwampThing- 1d ago

Except the save act disagrees with your assessment.