That makes you an outlier to be ignored on this subject. The SC has found they are not analogous.
Excuse me while I disagree with the Supreme Court. Since when are people ignored for disagreeing with the SC on their decisions here on the DR? Regardless, ignore me all you like. No skin off my back.
Also, there are some that believe even one case of voter fraud provides a rational basis for having voter ID.
So they are outliers as well. Why would you consider one outlier when you won't consider another? In my perspective, the risk of disenfranchising a segment of voters is far greater than the risk of voter fraud.
Why does there have to be a need?
Because there's a risk of disenfranchising people. And that's not good.
So, you're in favor of constitutional standards in one context but not another?
I'm looking for consistency amongst decisions involving people's rights. People have the right to vote and to marry. The rights of minorities (see everyone not in the majority) should not be dictated by the will of the majority. The benefit that comes with voter IDs is not worth the risk of disenfranchising people from exercising their right to vote.