First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Post Reply Should US voting age be lowered to 16?
lawdog 
40441 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 6/2/16

HolyDrumstick wrote:


Senjougahara_Hitagi wrote:


gornotck wrote:

No, not at all.

In fact, raise the voting age to 35 and 14 years of residency, that way only people old enough to be President can vote for President or any other political position.


Lets just make it so only white, land owning men can vote.


Race and age are two very different things. For example, you can go to jail for having consensual sex with someone who is underage. You will not go to jail for having consensual sex with someone of a different race.

OH, because it APPEARS to be an argument, when it is actually just the demonization of someone's beliefs. It misleads people into believing that the person you are basically insulting is evil, and therefore his argument must be wrong.

This is basically the same things bigots do to encourage compliance within their groups.

Example: You gonna let your son hang out with that fag? I mean, you might as well let him hang out with rapists and murders, because he ain't nothing but a sinner. (Disclaimer: This is not hate speech or in any way my personal beliefs, this is only an example.)

While the logic is present, because truly rape, murder, and homosexuality are all sins in Christianity, this overlooks the fact that other things, such as heterosexual lust and lying are also sins, and that everyone is a sinner in the eyes of Christianity. So, actually, this is intended to compare homosexuality with crimes, not sin, but uses the blanket of sin to make the comparison.

Additionally, this is how and why Christians are not bigots because they are Christians, and how bigots use Christianity as a banner for their bigotry. Saying something is a sin is much different than believing people should not have the right to do it....or hate for people who commit that sin.

So, what I am saying is....this nonsense really needs to stop.

Also, sorry for derailing the thread, but I feel like it needed to be said.


I read that as a sarcastic reference to the original voting requirements in America, and therefore dismissive of the opinion of which was quoted.

637 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 6/2/16
No, by giving them the right to vote means we legally recognize them as adults which does things like get rid of the labor laws protecting them from dangerous tasks or jobs at work since if we do that we may have to alter them. I don't think they'd want that necessarily especially since the pressures of school are already hard enough on them it seems. Most of them work hard there so that they don't have to make the bigger decisions the rest of society's adult sector has to make until later.
7910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
8500 / F / Apollo...
Offline
Posted 6/2/16
How about, instead of considering race, age, social status, etc. they restrict it to diplomatic aptitude and ample education? And by education, I mean a good enough understanding of political science, current affairs and the political system within one's own resident nation.
93 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/2/16

1stladyent wrote:

How about, instead of considering race, age, social status, etc. they restrict it to diplomatic aptitude and ample education? And by education, I mean a good enough understanding of political science, current affairs and the political system within one's own resident nation.


Yeah the problem with that is a it's undemocratic and b that makes Wilson our only president eligible to vote. Also that essentially eliminates lower class voters which cuts out a good chunk of minorities.
7910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
8500 / F / Apollo...
Offline
Posted 6/2/16

Hassan550 wrote:


1stladyent wrote:

How about, instead of considering race, age, social status, etc. they restrict it to diplomatic aptitude and ample education? And by education, I mean a good enough understanding of political science, current affairs and the political system within one's own resident nation.


Yeah the problem with that is a it's undemocratic and b that makes Wilson our only president eligible to vote. Also that essentially eliminates lower class voters which cuts out a good chunk of minorities.


Not exactly, it could be like applying for a job or internship. It doesn't cost anything to get on the internet or go to the library to do the research. Like naturalized citizens, in order to vote, you can test in. I didn't say anything about proof of a degree, and if those who were passionate enough to vote and want to vote wisely, it wouldn't hurt to hit the books. For free. And it still has nothing to do with statistical demographics or ethnographics.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/2/16

lawdog wrote:


I read that as a sarcastic reference to the original voting requirements in America, and therefore dismissive of the opinion of which was quoted.



This is true, but I read it as both. They could have just as easily said: Or we could go back to when only men could vote (Black men could vote before women, though discriminating laws made this difficult.)

However, in either case, it was an attempt to demonize and dismiss, as well as discredit the argument, and my mini-rant still applies.

Was actually told I should join ISIS for my views earlier. Because, apparently, having varying opinions means I want to kill people who don't hold mine or something.

Was just calling it out. That's all.
93 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/2/16

1stladyent wrote:


Hassan550 wrote:


1stladyent wrote:

How about, instead of considering race, age, social status, etc. they restrict it to diplomatic aptitude and ample education? And by education, I mean a good enough understanding of political science, current affairs and the political system within one's own resident nation.


Yeah the problem with that is a it's undemocratic and b that makes Wilson our only president eligible to vote. Also that essentially eliminates lower class voters which cuts out a good chunk of minorities.


Not exactly, it could be like applying for a job or internship. It doesn't cost anything to get on the internet or go to the library to do the research. Like naturalized citizens, in order to vote, you can test in. I didn't say anything about proof of a degree, and if those who were passionate enough to vote and want to vote wisely, it wouldn't hurt to hit the books. For free. And it still has nothing to do with statistical demographics or ethnographics.


We don't have the money for that at all. lso it totally has to do with demographics certain demographics are less likely to have the proper education or the access to public service centers. Also who writes the test politicians can't they'll try to skew it to fit their ideology
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/2/16

1stladyent wrote:

How about, instead of considering race, age, social status, etc. they restrict it to diplomatic aptitude and ample education? And by education, I mean a good enough understanding of political science, current affairs and the political system within one's own resident nation.


The line of thinking behind not doing this is that it discriminates against a certain demographic, in the way that some of the Jim Crow laws did.

Though, I am personally for this concept. I think it would be more than acceptable to require a test to vote, if there was free study material provided for those who asked. I'd even be in favor of classes.

Though, even this has the potential to be problematic, if the literature turned into more propaganda for or against policy and parties, rather than a study guide on critical thinking, politics, and the political system.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/2/16

Hassan550 wrote:
We don't have the money for that at all. lso it totally has to do with demographics certain demographics are less likely to have the proper education or the access to public service centers. Also who writes the test politicians can't they'll try to skew it to fit their ideology


My argument to this is simply that we cannot raise humanity without raising expectations. Education is much easier to acquire for everyone than it used to be, so there is little excuse for not being able to meet a very low education requirement. Also, study material could be provided free of charge, for those in need.

At some point, we'll have to raise our expectations of humanity, including minorities, and be held accountable for those expectations, if we ever expect to advance.

I feel like saying "But, too many of thisorthatdemographic will be unable to meet the requirements." ....when we have ample opportunity... is no longer cutting it.
93 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/2/16

HolyDrumstick wrote:


1stladyent wrote:

How about, instead of considering race, age, social status, etc. they restrict it to diplomatic aptitude and ample education? And by education, I mean a good enough understanding of political science, current affairs and the political system within one's own resident nation.


The line of thinking behind not doing this is that it discriminates against a certain demographic, in the way that some of the Jim Crow laws did.

Though, I am personally for this concept. I think it would be more than acceptable to require a test to vote, if there was free study material provided for those who asked. I'd even be in favor of classes.

Though, even this has the potential to be problematic, if the literature turned into more propaganda for or against policy and parties, rather than a study guide on critical thinking, politics, and the political system.


I feel like you nailed it on the head right there. In theory it is not bad but the practice is dangerous.
671 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 6/2/16

HolyDrumstick wrote:


Senjougahara_Hitagi wrote:


gornotck wrote:

No, not at all.

In fact, raise the voting age to 35 and 14 years of residency, that way only people old enough to be President can vote for President or any other political position.


Lets just make it so only white, land owning men can vote.


Race and age are two very different things. For example, you can go to jail for having consensual sex with someone who is underage. You will not go to jail for having consensual sex with someone of a different race.

OH, because it APPEARS to be an argument, when it is actually just the demonization of someone's beliefs. It misleads people into believing that the person you are basically insulting is evil, and therefore his argument must be wrong.

This is basically the same things bigots do to encourage compliance within their groups.

Example: You gonna let your son hang out with that fag? I mean, you might as well let him hang out with rapists and murders, because he ain't nothing but a sinner. (Disclaimer: This is not hate speech or in any way my personal beliefs, this is only an example.)

While the logic is present, because truly rape, murder, and homosexuality are all sins in Christianity, this overlooks the fact that other things, such as heterosexual lust and lying are also sins, and that everyone is a sinner in the eyes of Christianity. So, actually, this is intended to compare homosexuality with crimes, not sin, but uses the blanket of sin to make the comparison.

Additionally, this is how and why Christians are not bigots because they are Christians, and how bigots use Christianity as a banner for their bigotry. Saying something is a sin is much different than believing people should not have the right to do it....or hate for people who commit that sin.

So, what I am saying is....this nonsense really needs to stop.

Also, sorry for derailing the thread, but I feel like it needed to be said.



I was being sarcastic.

But anyway, I don't see why 18 year olds shouldn't be allowed to vote. They can join the military, they are seen as adults, they can get married, drive cars, get pregnant, pay taxes or whatever pretty much. Whats wrong with them being allowed to vote as well? Who cares if they aren't politically informed? Let them vote for who they want regardless if someone thinks they are wrong. Vote for Trump even. Should we stop mentally disabled people from voting too, since their brains might not be functioning correctly? If people think that an under developed frontal lobe is an argument, may as well not let them vote too. What about drug addicts? Should we not let people who are on drugs vote? I would much rather have an eighteen year old get a vote than someone who's currently on drugs (like my uncle who thinks Obama lives in his trailer with him and meets "Obama" at the liquor store, he even thinks Ronald Reagan is the sheriff of our county.)
But I would still let him vote, even if his vote was for Sheriff Ronald Reagan.

7910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
8500 / F / Apollo...
Offline
Posted 6/2/16

Hassan550 wrote:


1stladyent wrote:


Hassan550 wrote:


1stladyent wrote:

How about, instead of considering race, age, social status, etc. they restrict it to diplomatic aptitude and ample education? And by education, I mean a good enough understanding of political science, current affairs and the political system within one's own resident nation.


Yeah the problem with that is a it's undemocratic and b that makes Wilson our only president eligible to vote. Also that essentially eliminates lower class voters which cuts out a good chunk of minorities.


Not exactly, it could be like applying for a job or internship. It doesn't cost anything to get on the internet or go to the library to do the research. Like naturalized citizens, in order to vote, you can test in. I didn't say anything about proof of a degree, and if those who were passionate enough to vote and want to vote wisely, it wouldn't hurt to hit the books. For free. And it still has nothing to do with statistical demographics or ethnographics.


We don't have the money for that at all. lso it totally has to do with demographics certain demographics are less likely to have the proper education or the access to public service centers. Also who writes the test politicians can't they'll try to skew it to fit their ideology


Fair enough, I see what you're saying.

Politicians can't and won't write the test. The UN can step in and help write it. And of course there's no money for it. There's no money for everything actually, with a $19.5 trillion deficit, but allocation can be done, just like everything else. I've seen homeless people get access to the internet just to learn what they can, so what I'm saying is that narrowing the vote eligibility to the "educated" will whittle down the numbers of votes, making it easier to calculate, lowering the expense of ballot tracking and other neutral/unbiased positions employed due to the election. Those who are willing to put in the effort to do their research on placing someone in a leadership position are those who deserve to vote responsibly. You don't have to have a Ph.D, heck even an Associates or a HS Diploma to be educated.
93 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/2/16

HolyDrumstick wrote:


Hassan550 wrote:
We don't have the money for that at all. lso it totally has to do with demographics certain demographics are less likely to have the proper education or the access to public service centers. Also who writes the test politicians can't they'll try to skew it to fit their ideology


My argument to this is simply that we cannot raise humanity without raising expectations. Education is much easier to acquire for everyone than it used to be, so there is little excuse for not being able to meet a very low education requirement. Also, study material could be provided free of charge, for those in need.

At some point, we'll have to raise our expectations of humanity, including minorities, and be held accountable for those expectations, if we ever expect to advance.

I feel like saying "But, too many of thisorthatdemographic will be unable to meet the requirements." ....when we have ample opportunity... is no longer cutting it.


Unfortunately it is true that certain demographics are poorer and statistically poor neighborhoods have significantly worse educational institutions also in many of these communities education isn't a cultural value so it's not that they can't it's that just like being politically active is a trained behavior for you and me for them it's trained not to be.
3290 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F / Everywhere
Offline
Posted 6/2/16
Not a good idea. In the US most schools make seniors take government class, which is the year that almost all students earn the right to vote. Therefore, if the age was lowered, we'd either have even more uneducated voters or the educational system would have to be changed to take this lower age into account, which comes with its own set of issues.
93 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/2/16
Also is it fair to tax those who can't vote?
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.