As far as I can tell this is the result of an interaction between laws, and not the result of the law itself.
It's not as if "laws being copyright-punishable" was an intended design decision when they were written up, so it seems disingenuous to phrase it as if this were the case.
Trying to establish an equivalence between a man and a political system seems a _touch_ cult-of-personality-like don't you think?
I think there are plenty of defensible arguments one can give to say that Edward Snowden is not a traitor, but pearl-clutching hyperbolics leave me completely unconvinced.
But see this is the same issue, just in the opposite direction. I don't understand what relevance any of this identity politicking has to do with electorates.
The idea of "One Person, One Vote" and that no one's vote is inherently more valuable that another's, irregardless of that person's gender, age, class, sexuality, mental ability or what have you.
_Stupid_ people being able to vote is a feature. The young and inexperienced being able to vote is a feature. The crotchety old stubborn types being able to vote is a feature. None of these are bugs.
The question of the hour is "What can we do to create a more informed, civically responsible public". To this end my honest belief is to encourage people to stop watching network television and reading editorialized, propaganda clickbait articles from partisan online sources (Your Brietbarts and Salons and Voxes and Gawkers).
The disdain and disgust impressed on the elderly in this issue in particular is distressing. Seeing people advocate for selective voting or implying that the younger persons' views are worth more because of their older countrymen's vicinity to expiration is personally upsetting as a self-loathing Millenial.
It's not as if "laws being copyright-punishable" was an intended design decision when they were written up, so it seems disingenuous to phrase it as if this were the case.