In many states, convicted felons are unwelcome on Election Day. In the past few years, the debate on whether convicted felons should be allowed to vote while in prison was rekindled. Over five million Americans could not exercise their voting rights in the coming polls due to state laws disenfranchising felony convicts.

However, Maryland allows its ex-felons to vote under supervisory release while still barring convicted prisoners, giving rise to a new question of ethics; is voting a fundamental human right or a privilege? Is it time for #Marylandvoters to overturn the law that bars imprisoned felons from voting?

Bernie Sanders, a U.S. senator, claimed that "the right to vote should be extended even for terrible people like the Boston Marathon Bomber." According to Sanders, disenfranchising convicted felons should not be a consequence of a crime, as they are already paying the price.

Regardless of conviction, prisoners remain human beings, and their human rights should be respected with minimum infringements on their liberty, except in instances of public protection. Denying convicted felons voting rights is not a form of public protection but an unwarranted infringement on the prisoners' inherent democratic rights.

On the other hand, many believe that felons should have no voice in the matter of our next leaders, as they lost that privilege when they disrespected the law. They explain that felons break the law deliberately and with the intention of not getting caught. That attitude should not be partaking in electing officials.

The question for debate is, should Maryland voters overturn the law that bars imprisoned felons from voting?