Children's Suffrage?

[Halo_Jones]

I don't think under 16's should vote, and I don't really think the majority really care and wouldn't bother even if they did have a choice.

I do know some very mature under 16's though who would love the chance to have their say, they are also intelligent enough to realise that in 2 years they will have that right reguardless, so untill then, why bore themselves with reading up on all the prospective candidates and policies before they vote..cause thats what we adults do...Right?

Scary thought! If a 16yr old is too immature to vote what happens in the next year to make them mature and responsible enough to drive a car????

[Fenris]

You cannot arbitrarily choose an age and say that people are only ready to vote at that age.

We can and do... and with good reason. As others have pointed out since, making an informed political choise involves the application of experience of the real (and ADULT) world. Experience that children, even a mature child, has not yet had.

Personaly I'd be in favour of RAISING the minimum voting age, thought that would probably put me in as small a minority as you appear to be in

[Fluffybunny]

Just to drop in my two cents worth.

That was worth at least five bucks.

Very well put, I couldn't have said it better myself.

Thank you for putting it so tactfully.

[chico del nacho]

the coming election in america with minors voting:

(these are just random numbers)

Spongebob Squarepants: 62%

Blink 182 (yes all of them): 13%

Hamtaro: 12%

Kerry: 7%

Bush: 6%

[Druidus]

We can and do... and with good reason. As others have pointed out since, making an informed political choise involves the application of experience of the real (and ADULT) world. Experience that children, even a mature child, has not yet had.

Personaly I'd be in favour of RAISING the minimum voting age, thought that would probably put me in as small a minority as you appear to be in 

Indeed. So magically when we hit the age of 18 we can vote properly? The day before we turn 18 we can't understand at all, and we're immature?

[DC09]

No one under 18 should be allowed to vote. Hell, there are some people over 18 who shouldn't be allowed.

[TheOracle]

I believe the majority of people under the age of 18 would be incapable of making a decision like that responsibly. I don't believe they have enough life experience for a start.

I can just see it now...Evanescense running the world...I don't think so.

[Seraphina]

Indeed. So magically when we hit the age of 18 we can vote properly? The day before we turn 18 we can't understand at all, and we're immature?

To be quite frank, yes

Alot usually happens in a person's life in the year between 17 and 18...usually leaving school, searching for a university, starting to work...it's when people leave the nest for the first time, and the average 18 year old will have a far greater chance of making an informed choice than a 17 year old will, who's more concerned with what their homework is, than what's going on in the world; far greater than that one year would suggest.

[stillcrazy]

No one under 18 should be allowed to vote. Hell, there are some people over 18 who shouldn't be allowed.

LOL

That's why I suggest some sort of testing in order to get a voter registration card. And before anyone says it unfair to illiterates or others of a particular race, we currently allow folks who can't read the ability to get a drivers license by taking an oral test instead of a writen test. Even though most state laws require that the person be able to read BASIC english. So that argument goes out the window.

Main problem with voting in this country is we don't vote on our knowledge of the issues, but who combs his hair better and wears nicer suits. It's a personality contest, and not a political race.

[Druidus]

Well, obviously our beliefs are very diversified. That's what makes us alive !

Anyway, what I propose, is a test formulated to see if people should be allowed to vote. Anyone at any age can take the test and if they pass they can vote. If they don't pass, then they are sentenced to the fiery pits of hell!!!!!

... Or just having to wait for the next test.

Sound fair to everyone?

[Seraphina]

That depends on exactly how much those program is going to cost, and if that cost would be justified given a very small percentage indeed of the test takers would be likely to pass

[Xenojjin]

Some kids will be ready to vote at age 15 or 16 .

I would say this druidus : you are probobly ready to vote as you seem to have your own views on life and are pretty mature for your age .

But you have to understand that the majority of people at around 13-17 in age are complete and total nincompoops who don't even know 1% of the stuff they think that they know . Even an exam wouldn't rot them all out . Furthermore , I agree with what sera said earlier . With most kids it would simply be an additional vote for their parents .

funny thing is , I wich IQ tests were more accurate . That way we can ban idiots from voting as well since come to think of it .... a lot of people above 17 years are still complete and total nincompoops who dont know 1% of what they think they know .

[stillcrazy]

Xenojjin

funny thing is , I wich IQ tests were more accurate . That way we can ban idiots from voting as well since come to think of it .... a lot of people above 17 years are still complete and total nincompoops who dont know 1% of what they think they know .

My point was just that. It would not be a question of how old you are, but how much you really know.

An old quote says, "War is nature's way of teaching our children geography" It does have a grain of truth to it. When I was a kid I had no idea where Korea was, all I knew was my dad's war stories of the place. But I sure as hell knew where Viet Nam was, and China and Russia and Cambodia. Ask the average kid in High School today and they can't tell you where any of the smaller countries are, some can't even tell you Russia's location. Sad huh?

Instead of the political battle cry of 'Get Out And Vote" How about we start yelling "Get Out And Learn"

Edited May 12, 2004 by stillcrazy

[Fenris]

Indeed.  So magically when we hit the age of 18 we can vote properly?  The day before we turn 18 we can't understand at all, and we're immature?

Your prooving my point with your inability to see past the individual to the generic.

Things like minimum age limits aren't about individuals, they are a point where its considered the majority will be mature enough.

[Druidus]

Yes but excluding some for the sole reason of not wanting the idiots to get through is unfair. There must be better ways.

What if one day, you were told that you are now unable to vote simply because there are known to be immature, idiotic people at your age? And don't say there isn't, there are many immature, idiotic adults. I bet most would protest it. The only *fair* way is a nationwide test, once per year. It doesn't have to be expensive. It could be held at schools for the younger ones, and for adults the workplace could have signup sheets and on a certain day you go and take it somewhere. It would only be an hour to an hour and a half long.

It would have to be based not on the actual candidates, but on knowledge of the political system and of the world around you.

I just found something cool! Theres a mock election for Canada's teens in October. They will compare the votes to the adults and, perhaps, lower the voting age. Cool!

Edited May 12, 2004 by Druidus

[Seraphina]

It would have to be based not on the actual candidates, but on knowledge of the political system and of the world around you.

Define "knowledge of the political system"....what is considered to be a demonstration of good political sense would depend entirerly on whoever's marking the papers. Nobody's political veiws are exactly alike, and any test would simply lead to an elitist veiw in which only people expressing a certain political inclination would be allowed to pass.

[Fenris]

It would have to be based not on the actual candidates, but on knowledge of the political system and of the world around you.

Define "knowledge of the political system"....what is considered to be a demonstration of good political sense would depend entirerly on whoever's marking the papers. Nobody's political veiws are exactly alike, and any test would simply lead to an elitist veiw in which only people expressing a certain political inclination would be allowed to pass.

Quite! Most adults who have actualy had experience with the political system would almost all, I suspect, spot the inherant flaw....

Namely whichever body was responcible for defining "what is considered to be a demonstration of good political sense" simply could not be trusted not to bias that definition in favour of strengthening the position of the political adgenda that they themselves believe in.

Another thing I think is needed to apply a political franchise responcibly, a well developed sceptisism of politicians balanced with a realistic apraisal of the neccessitys of running a modern country (Which isn't always 'fair', from whatever perspective you want to define 'fair'!). That balance is another thing which can only truely come from experience of living as an adult!

[Druidus]

I didn't say that type of test, I meant knowledge of the political system and the world around us. How it runs, how the government and the political system work. That's what the test would be on. Nothing to do with political parties at all, so no bias.

[Fenris]

There you go again!

What is considered 'good political sense' about the political system and about general world politics is VERY much open to Bias and hidden adgendas.... which you will come to realise with more practical experience of living as an adult....

[Seraphina]

hmm...*looks at Druidus' dob*...I'm beginning to understand why you feel so strongly on this issue now...

Allow me to ask you a question...

Does the political knowledge you have, at this moment in time, come from your own experience in the world, and things that effect you, or simply what you hear from parents, friends, teachers, and the media?

Whether you like it or not, you're currently in an environment where you're not only far too protected from the outside world to fully understand the implications of most aspects of party policy simply because they've never had any effect on you directly, one way or the other, but you're also far too open to being influenced by the opinions of authority figures and role models.

That's why the legal age for voting is reserved for people who are at least slightly more aware of what it's like in the real world...make no mistake, I'm not exactly 100% politically literate either, but at least I've spent enough time out and about on my own to observe the state of the country through my own two eyes.

That's something that most people simply aren't able to do until they leave school.

[snuffypuffer]

Sera pretty much hit that one right out of the park. Druidus, you really don't seem to have much in the way of real life experience. When you've been out in the world for a while and seen some things, you'll be much more jaded and understand that a "political test" to decide who gets to vote will be a very bad idea, as it will be biased towards the beliefs and opinions of those administering the test. And attempting to restrict voting from some of the yahoos who are already used to making things worse by using their priviledge to vote is also gonna crack open a whole new can of worms. Never underestimate the power of idiots in large numbers.

[Aslan]

Never underestimate the power of idiots in large numbers.

Just look at the House of Commons.

[Druidus]

Actually, I am out of school. I understand the world, most likely a lot better than most. I teach myself, and my opinions are my own. I don't change them when I hear another person's. I certainly don't follow my friends, my parents or the media. Most of my friends don't give a damn either way, my parents have widely different views then I, and media is something that I never trust, regardless. I base my opinions on what I see is appropriate, and no one else can lead me. I will not be a "sheeple" . lol

I think that just because something is difficult doesn't mean it's not right. So what if it will bring a "whole new can of worms"? It will also bring equality to all ages. Perhaps, the test can be made up by people with all different perspectives. People from every political stance could make it up.

Edited May 12, 2004 by Druidus

[Fenris]

I understand the world, most likely a lot better than most

Funny then how none of that comes across in these posts. Your fanciful and nieve 'test' maybe a nice idea, but I didn't think this thread was about pie-in-the-sky idealism, rather concepts that stand a chance of working in the real world?

As the adults in this thread have repeatedly pointed out, the situation is such that any such measure would result in bias and possible elitism that would end up actualy taking you further from your 'perception' of 'fair' than it is now.

The thought of you being able to simply sweep the current system with all its flaws, its party lines, dogma and rhetoric under the carpet is not one that any adult would find credable... I know you haven't explicitly stated thats what you'd want... however in order to impliment what you suggest, in the manner in which you suggest it then sweeping away the current system is exactly what you would need to do.

[Novo]

I understand the world, most likely a lot better than most

Funny then how none of that comes across in these posts. Your fanciful and nieve 'test' maybe a nice idea, but I didn't think this thread was about pie-in-the-sky idealism, rather concepts that stand a chance of working in the real world?

As the adults in this thread have repeatedly pointed out, the situation is such that any such measure would result in bias and possible elitism that would end up actualy taking you further from your 'perception' of 'fair' than it is now.

The thought of you being able to simply sweep the current system with all its flaws, its party lines, dogma and rhetoric under the carpet is not one that any adult would find credable... I know you haven't explicitly stated thats what you'd want... however in order to impliment what you suggest, in the manner in which you suggest it then sweeping away the current system is exactly what you would need to do.

Anarchism and our views having nothing to do with this thread, But you decided to attack our beliefs rather than the subject at hand I will point out to you Anarchism is not about merely "Switching" the current system, Its about working torwards a better future that maybe I my children and my great great grandchildren will never see Its about making a "Required Evil" no longer required, All said can we please resume the argument? I do hate to say it druid but most kids are not concerned about politics and dont honestly deserve a vote, but hey most of the people voting where I live are rednecks who vote for a man based on the size of his beard!

Edited May 14, 2004 by Student&Alive