Minnesota

839 readers

6 users here now

About Us

We are community-driven and dedicated to celebrating the diverse and inclusive spirit of Minnesota. Whether you're a lifelong resident, a recent transplant, or simply fascinated by the Land of 10,000 Lakes, you'll find a warm and welcoming community here. Our goal is to foster meaningful discussions, share local news and events, and create a safe space for everyone to connect and engage.

Rules and Guidelines

Be Kind and Respectful: Treat others with empathy, respect, and understanding. We embrace diversity and encourage civil discourse. Personal attacks, hate speech, discrimination, and harassment will not be tolerated.

Stay on Topic: Keep your posts and comments relevant to Minnesota. Let's focus on discussing local issues, events, news, and culture.

No Spam or Self-Promotion: We love to support local businesses and initiatives, but please refrain from excessive self-promotion or spamming. Posts must provide value to the community.

Avoid Sensationalism: When sharing news articles or stories, please provide accurate and reliable sources. Avoid clickbait titles or exaggerated claims.

No Illegal Activities: Do not promote or encourage illegal activities or engage in any discussions that violate the law.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

153

‘My voice matters’: Felons vote at polls for first time after voting rights restored (www.mprnews.org)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

30 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The monumental day comes despite two legal challenges that attempted to undercut it. Last Thursday, the Minnesota Court of Appeals struck down a legal challenge by Mille Lacs County District Court Judge Matthew Quinn against Restore the Vote. Quinn had barred at least six defendants from voting as part of their sentences and argued the voting law was unconstitutional.

In an order, Chief Judge Susan Segal wrote that Quinn had no authority to declare the law unconstitutional. And Segal said Quinn’s actions were “unauthorized by law.”

Another lawsuit by conservative voter’s group Minnesota Voters Alliance is pending in Anoka County before District Court Judge Thomas Lehmann. A first hearing was held on Oct. 30, but Lehmann has not issued a ruling on the case yet.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] CoffeeJunkie -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I am very aware of that, and the law needs to be reformed to reflect reality. We know those aren't pedophiles. I'm not addressing the outliers. What about the real pedophiles, the real rapists? I don't respect their judgment or voice. Why should we allow them to vote?

[–] FreeFacts 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are people who don't respect the judgement or voice of people who have abortions, or provide them. The former probably ask about the latter "why should we allow them to vote" too. That just emphasizes the fact that personal feelings are not good enough reason to limit a right. The right to vote should be the basis. As a right it needs no justification, on the contrary, any limitations to it are the ones that need to be justified. And justified better than "I don't respect this and that".

[–] CoffeeJunkie 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Fair enough, but I also want to point out a bit of a false equivalence. Rape & abortion. While there is plenty of debate about abortion, its legality & justification, there is no such debate that I'm aware of about rape. Except maybe among, you know, rapists. 😂 There is no pro-rape coalition; virtually everyone is in agreement: rape is a terrible act & is never justified.

[–] FreeFacts 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

While there is plenty of debate about abortion, its legality & justification, there is no such debate that I'm aware of about rape.

There actually is, but it is not on the same level. It's on the definition level, as in what constitutes as rape. And believe me, there are lots of people who will be in agreement that rape is a terrible act, but will also defend a rapist because the legal definition of rape doesn't match what they perceive as rape.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Please tell me how you decide this, oh grand arbiter of crimes?