Do women deserve to vote?

>>132049013
no

Only if they belong to one of the following classes:

1.) Property Owners
2.) Veterans
3.) Business Owners

Maybe some other ones but those are the big ones.

>>132049013
It's not about "deserving", women aren't fit for roles other than raising children and being wives.

>>132049013
No.

>>132049013
No. Neither do you for being a landless, girlless, porn addict.

>>132049013
no, also no jobs

File: 798345890.jpg (176KB, 1024x882px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1024x882px

>>132049013
Jew, jew go away!

Shill this shit another day!

Yes but It should be worth half a mans vote

>>132049123
>inherit property from daddy
>be a spoiled whore, know jack shit about politics
>vote

>have no inheritance from daddy
>be a proper woman with a keen interest in politics
>can't vote

Genius.

File: 1485281996965.jpg (255KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 1920x1080px

No.

voting is not something you earn through some sort of effort

voting is something that is relegated to those most likely to use it well

native males of any country who are married, should receive the right to vote

>>132049676
women voting at all?

It should be one vote per couple, only married people should be allowed to vote too.

>>132049013
yes

File: 1498252805884.png (18KB, 390x401px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 390x401px

Women hating is anti white

File: 1494809892670.jpg (198KB, 960x684px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 960x684px

>>132050381

File: 1475665282287.jpg (66KB, 374x395px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 374x395px

>>132050475
>>132050381

>>132050187
>be drunkard idiot native to his nation
>know jack shit about politics, only a slave to media manipulation
>vote

>be female
>have a keen interest in politics, not influenced by media manipulation
>can't vote

Genius system. Sasuga /pol/.

>>132050247
Women shouldn't be systematically denied a vote, and neither should men be systematically allowed to vote.

I think it would be worth it to strip women of the right to vote, provided they are given the privilege of not having to pay taxes, and the government must take care of them if they're destitute, kinda like how the government takes care of abandoned kids.

>>132049676
its called having "skin in the game"

Even your proposed idiot woman with inheritance has something to lose vice a supposed "intelligent" woman who has absolutely nothing to lose.

>>132049054
fpbp /thread

herbed.

>>132049013
No, they lack the intelligence

>>132049013
these feet dude, orgasmic!

>>132049013
Parents deserve the vote.
Childless adults don't.

One group is invested in the success of their nation because their children have to inhabit it after they die, the other group have no vested interest in the outcome of government.

>>132050626
>Even your proposed idiot woman with inheritance has something to lose
Who cares? Those who have "skin in the game" need to be educated before being allowed to cast a vote. Nothing else matters.

Everyone deserves to take equal part in a completely irrelevant decision-making act that won't change anything.

>>132050626
With respect to laws created by the government and taxes:
Everyone has skin in the game.
If you deny someone the right to vote, why should they pay taxes at all? Or obey any of your laws? Why shouldn't they murder you?
Taxation without representation is wrong.

>>132050847
>be Kant
>devote your life to the pursuit of knowledge, but die a virgin
>never vote

>be white trash idiot
>marry some druggie whore, have 10 kids
>vote

More arbitrary criteria for voting please. I'm enjoying this.

File: rhgtvbhnytg.jpg (75KB, 500x667px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 500x667px

>>132049013
Women should not vote or hold elected office, period. Anyone under 21 should not vote. Anyone between 21 and 30 who is unmarried should not vote (religious exceptions apply, like for Catholic priests)

File: 1431905539956.png (52KB, 954x259px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 954x259px

>>132049013
hell no

File: facepalm.png (24KB, 128x128px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 128x128px

these anti-woman infographics that have been getting reposted for 5 years are just nigger tier fake news. Believing anything seriously from a infographic posted on 4chan = you're a moron.

As a Republican, giving women the right to vote was one of my party's major accomplishments. Why would I want to take away what my party fought for decades to achieve?

>>132049013
No, neither does anyone under the age of 21

File: 1492645758083.png (2MB, 720x8640px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 720x8640px

>>132051497

>>132050573
>Keen interest in politics
>Not measurable
>Therefore everyone has the right to vote
>Country goes to shit

>>132051551
Because this "muh party" herd mentality is for idiots. I guess it's just right for you.

>>132049013
Voting should be a privilege and should require a competency test on political issues and government in general to weed out the dumbfucks.
That being said, if such a test were to be instituted most women would fail.

File: ads.jpg (78KB, 643x820px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 643x820px

>>132051616
get a life

>>132051248
This is probably a good enough standard, the vote goes to anyone who is a net taxpayer

File: 1487501357651.jpg (734KB, 1900x1364px) Image search: [Google]

734KB, 1900x1364px

>>132051707

>>132051632
>ability to drive a car
>not measurable
>therefore everyone has the right to drive a car
>country goes to shit

Or, we could propose a test and award driving licences! Wow! Who would've thought!

>>132051551
Because now the party is losing its strongholds to socialist liberal womyns.
It is inherent in women to be liberal, while it is inherent in men to be strong and resilient.

feet

File: lindsay-lohan.jpg (1MB, 2215x1477px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2215x1477px

no

>>132051248
non-citizens pay taxes yet do not have the right to vote. Your argument does pass muster.

>>132051055
Having skin in the game makes you a more responsible voter. It's not wrong to vote along your own interests - education really has nothing to do with it. Our system was built with this in mind, and the founding fathers knew not all voters would be educated. Education was a rare commodity when the the nation was founded.

File: e3dbb1e8d1c6a79a5f9417d0863906e7.jpg (63KB, 564x752px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 564x752px

>>132049013
No

>>132049013
Oh thank God, mods are finally deleting clickbait pics

>>132051318
Universal suffrage gives pink-haired man-hating feminists the same number of votes as incel neckbeard bloated autismos. These people have no place determining which direction society heads.

I'd take the judgement of the poorest parent over some MLP fellating basement-dweller any day of the week.

>>132051751
We're already past the point of rational argumentation. Look up any of the sources in these infographics, it's all from nonreputable sources or non-existent sources. All that's left to discuss is how much of a fool somebody has to be to accept substantial claims without looking for proof.

>>132051757
A test that measures interest in politics?
Kek

File: absolutely.jpg (18KB, 214x265px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 214x265px

>>132049013
>anime
>foot fag

Kill yourself.

>>132051874
>Education was a rare commodity when the the nation was founded
And now it isn't. So don't hold people to the same standards as they were 300 years ago. Everyone in the civilised world has the access to a library and there is no excuse for anyone not to be educating themselves.

Btw you're all good goyim for falling for the (((democracy))) jew

>>132052062
Low IQ idiots like you wouldn't be allowed to vote.

>>132050573
>every single married native man is a drunkard idiot
>every single unmarried non native female has a keen interest in politics

yeah good argument, faggot

>>132051937
>>132052308
/pol/ is full of idiots with the reading comprehension of a child. Why am I not surprised.

>>132052150
Some people never learn

>>132052267

>Falling for the democracy jew
>Calling other people low IQ

>>132051874
With respect to taxes on non-citizens:
Since a non-citizen has to obtain a visa or green card from the Federal Government to work, I wouldn't consider it related at all.
In fact, I would argue that such work would fall into the jurisdiction of international trade, and therefore wouldn't be considered "taxation without representation."
To argue otherwise would be similar to arguing that tariffs on foreign goods are "taxation without representation" which is an absurd comparison. Since obviously a federal government has power to control international trade and control borders.

>>132052409
Nice ad hom

I hope your Ancap parents sell your boipussi to the highest bidder

>>132052577
There is no alternative without a rational population. I'm trying to perfect it.

>>132052874
You missed my point, which is clearly laid out. This must mean that you're an idiot. And look up the definition of "ad hom" before you accuse someone of committing it again.

>>132051874
>>132052755
Therefore, principally, the notion of "taxation without representation" is a statement about jurisdiction.
Or put more succinctly, if you are solely and naturally under American jurisdiction, it is wrong to deny representation.
A non citizen is fundamentally not naturally in the jurisdiction of the US, and therefore can be denied the right to vote, until he becomes "naturalized" and is not naturally in the jurisdiction of the US.
Sure, the non-citizen has to respect the laws where he resides, but this is accepted as part of the terms for the agreement of "international trade."

>>132051248
>why should they pay taxes at all?
Women are a net loss on the tax system, they take out far more in services than they put in from working. Even if you only look at the top 10% of women who miraculously are skilled enough to perform in a high-paying job (and not a government make-work desk warmer), the hours they choose to work and the years they can maintain those hours are less than the average male and even these top-tier earning women are a net drain of tax revenue.

>Or obey any of your laws?
They don't. Women aren't held accountable for anything unless it would cause bad publicity somehow. Do you want the screencap collage of headlines like "Woman tries to stab boyfriend to death, but court gives her no criminal record because it would hurt her career." When convicted of a crime, women are sentenced to 30% of the penalty or severity that men on average are given.

>Why shouldn't they murder you?
Women kill the vast majority of children in the US every year. Most frequently their own, but also step-children or any under the sole custody of a female are the most likely demographic to die. The most dangerous place for a child under 18 is with their biological mother. Women are also the most likey demographic to rape a minor (yes, some highschool boys are probably fine with it, but you don't jeopardize a child's emotional development like that - especially when it's illegal, and we all know what happens to a man if he rapes a minor.)

>Taxation without representation is wrong.
Children do not have the right to vote, but they can legally be employed in various capacities as young as 12. Is this wrong to you? Are children an abused underclass being deprived of their rights? Of course not. They are protected and looked after by all of society. Harming a child is one of the biggest social taboos across all belief systems. But giving children full authority would end badly - they would vote for ice cream and pizza for every meal.

File: heinekin meme.jpg (114KB, 500x717px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 500x717px

>>132049013
obviously not if they are just going to pick someone because they have a vagina. Stupid cunts almost cost us our country.

>>132049013
it depends what you think the purpose of voting is.

If it's to produce a nation or government that creates a healthy (mentally and physically) population of productive adults that can one day create masterworks like artificial intelligence, FTL travel, clean energy etc so our descendants can live in a post scarcity utopia

or if it's to represent the will of the people, no matter how convoluted, inefficient, self destructive and most likely doomed to end with our extinction it is.

If the former, then no they don't, but then neither do 99.99% of people.

>>132053163
nigger

>>132053388
>Women are a net loss on the tax system...
I don't consider this an argument against representation. The government isn't obligated to provide them services that result in a net loss, and therefore isn't part of the equation of "taxation without representation."
All that matters with respect to taxation is if money is being taken from their pay check, property, or sales taxes. Because again, the government doesn't have to provide the services that result in the net drain on taxes. This could obviously be changed, and there is debate on whether or not we should provide fewer services to women or to poorer people. But this is a completely separate debate.
>They don't. Women aren't held accountable for anything unless it would cause bad publicity somehow...
Women kill the vast majority of children in the US every year...
Okay, obviously this is wrong. But are you saying that the solution to this injustice is to deny women the right to vote? That would somehow absolve all of the ethical issues?
Or perhaps the better solution is to reform the system to have equal punishment?
>Children do not have the right to vote, but they can legally be employed in various capacities as young as 12.
Children are under the legal authority of their parents until 18 years of age. Hence all of their political representation is through their parents. Hence I believe a child cannot legally form contracts without parental consent until the legal age of adulthood.

File: 1496124513057.png (72KB, 449x498px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 449x498px

>>132049013
if women loose the right to vote can trans women still vote?

>>132049013
first thing they voted for was prohibition, they should have just turned around and sent them back to the kitchen right then and there

>>132051757
Stop posting, retard. You measure groups by the mean not outliers.>>132051643
>>132051055

File: 28-back-in-my-day-sexist-meme.png (238KB, 450x480px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 450x480px

>>132049013

No.

They belong in the kitchen.

>>132052001
>when hearing nigger hurts more than unwilling sexual acts

>>132054647
You are shifting the goalposts. YOU were the one who questioned if women did not have the right to vote, why should they pay taxes at all. They do not contribute in any way to a productive society, so they should not have a voice in that society's policies. The government will provide them services that result in a net loss because that is precisely what women will vote for every time. "Taxation without representation" isn't part of any equation as it is not part of our law. It is not in our Constitution or Bill of Rights, it was a slogan of a political campaign. There is literally nothing wrong with a population being taxed yet not receiving representation, you are welcome to be opposed to this concept on an emotional or moral level but there is no legal argument behind it. The constitution makes no explicit statement of the right to vote other than the States get to define it for their own population. As we have seen by the terrible condition of several states today - they chose wrong.

>>132049013
no

>>132054647
>Okay, obviously this is wrong.
No, it is actually correct. How much research have you actually done into perpetrators of child murder in this US per year? Nothing pisses me off more than someone dismissing something out of hand right away because they don't think it could possibly be true. Yes, in TV shows and movies it is always the big bad straight white male going around harassing women, disrespecting the gay muslims, and killing innocent children. But in reality men just aren't going around murdering kids to get some laughs.

Again, Captain Goalposts, YOU were the one who asked "If women were denied the right to vote, what incentive do they have to follow the laws"?" They already do not follow them, they should not have the right to vote until they do.

You bring up a solid point though - how about reforming the system to have equal punishment? From a logical standpoint this is a fantastic solution and I agree with your thinking here. From a practical standpoint though it falls flat. Women will never vote for equal punishment, because they vote for special treatment and preferences for themselves EVERY TIME. Women have a 4:1 bias of favoring other women over men, this is harmless when it is choosing who they want to take for the BOGO coffee special, but an incredibly dangerous precedent when it is things like female police offers or judges having the final say in someone getting a warning, a normal fine, or a catastrophic life-destroying sentence.

On top of this, men ALSO on average have a bias toward women. Something about instinct and wanting to protect the vulnerable population if you can imagine. Male judges are also guilty of dropping the ball here. It would be great to have perfect equality, but it would require overcoming human nature for the majority of the population.

>>132054647
It is not realistic, it's not feasible, it's not practical, and even if by a miracle we had some sort of method to make it somewhat happen, people would slow slip back into their old ways "Gee she's just a little girl, we can let her off with a warning just this one time." etc.

We are ALMOST on the same page with the children metaphor though. You are correct that parents are usually required for contracts that children cannot legally form. But your initial claim was regarding being taxed without representation being unjust. While the child can not legally enter employment on their own, their wages are still the product of their own labor, they do not belong to the parent. They are literally being taxed without representation. Instead of being outraged about this situation everyone (including you) seems to be fine with this arrangement.

This arrangement is exactly what people want to see happen with women's voting. They will be under the legal authority of their father, until they are passed off to their husband. All of their political representation will be through the closest male relative in their life. Remember that while women consistently vote for things that will advantage women, men for for things that will be fair for everyone. Back when only men could vote, they could have voted for female-only immigration, or allowing men to have multiple wives, etc. but they tried to be fair and granted rights and privileges to everyone even to their own detriment.