Well, to be more clear, you were giving up on the constitution earlier, believing citizens shouldn't vote without service. And with your newer post, it seems you want to throw away the systems we have now, because we aren't keeping to it perfectly, but maybe i'm wrong about that.

So, i wonder what we should do instead.

No, my argument is that 2A needs to be upheld, people need to push back against it, but that voting is a privilege with attached responsibility being treated as a right (but only circumstantially, oddly)

The idea behind public service as a precursor to franchise is that ultimately you are weeding out the people who dont actually want it, or the people who dont actually value it might be a better way of explaining it

you're not basing it on IQ, any particular arbitrary set of characteristics, etc

Only on one's willingness to serve the public, and the nation, as should be the purpose of one in public office, and as should be the goal of any system of arbitration based around the nation's continuance

Ya, that goes against the constitution....
Tho i don't disagree with you about holding the 2A (like i uphold every other one).

Then I expect to see you taking steps to bring state powers back, pretty much demolish the NSA as it stands currently, and yeet just about all firearms legislation, because those also go against the constitution. At what point does the pushback happen?
And again, 2A is not like the other ones. It's the most important one

There is a time and place to push back, have we passed it yet? Are we still waiting for it? These are all good questions, we will wait to find out.

If you were determined to uphold the constitution, it's well past the time to push back lol

you dont get to do this "voting is for everyone because the constitution says" and then go all relativist on me for every other constitutional violation over the past ~100 years

I can.
There is a big difference between, not taking someones human rights away (creating a tier system to vote).
And allowing a process that has always happened and will continue to happen till its time to stop it.

Sorry, but if your core source of rights is the constitution, you dont get to ignore violations of the constitution when it suits you

that's not how it works

You can have what you want to happen, and what you are willing to allow to happen before stepping in to change it.

either the constitution is *not* the basis for your rights, in which case, my voting change cannot be met with "but muh constituion" *or* you now have to care about all the violations that have continued to go on

I'm talking about your level of consistency - or rather, your lack thereof

Its wholly consistent to understand what is happening in the world, and make smart choices about what you choose to go to war about.

lol no
Again
You dont get to use the constitution as the basis for what is and isn't allowable, when you dont care about violations of the constitution

I dont get to say "You're restricted to even numbers" and then throw a 7 in there just because I feel like it

You've decided to make an appeal to authority that, evidently, you dont even respect enough for it to be immutable, from a principled standpoint

and yet you ask me to respect it

so no, "muh constitution" is not a valid basis for voting as a right, as evidenced by both of our stated positions. You're going to have to dig a little deeper

I'm not asking you to do anything, you are free to push any system you want. I'm telling you, that what you propose is an awful system, i also didn't just say because of the constitutions, i clearly said it also a horrible tier system of voting.

While it may have usefulness, it will make for an unstable 2nd class system.

You made a blunt assertion with no backing. Hardly a convincing argument

you also live in a country where the system has already been implemented in the inverse - people who do not serve have their voting "rights" taken away

Is that the rule tho?

yes
Depending on the state, a federal offense carries with it the removal of franchise for a period of time. Some states dont have a maximum period - removal is indefinite

not signing up for SS by 26 can get you charged, thereby removing your right to vote temporarily or permanently

what's more, this two tier system specifically targets a section of the population based on arbitrary characteristics

so already my suggestion is an upgrade ;)

No, again, i understand those laws. But those don't change the general rule.

what?

>voting is an immutable right
>except when it isn't

how is that not creating an "unstable second tier"?

Are free citizens allowed to vote? Yes. Are their some instances where this can be taking away? Yes (depending on your actions). Does this change the rule that free citizens are allowed to vote? No.

Unless you believe everything can be perfect.

Sorry, a person who does not sign up for service getting their voting rights taken away is a free citizen?

There are very limited instances of that really happening, but i am also one that would like that rule to be changed. None of that changes the general rule.

So what is the specific general rule then?