 |
|  |
 |
|
Sava
|
 |
GO GO GO!
Mar 2001 time: 23:20
|
|
If 16-17 year olds are going to complain about paying taxes and not having a vote, then perhaps we should make it illegal for them to work (then they don't have to worry about paying taxes). 
Society has deemed that 18 is the arbitrary age where kids become mature enough to enter into contracts, vote, etc... It may be arbitrary, but since there is no fair way to judge maturity, we need that arbitrary limit. I disagree with letting kids vote because they aren't mature at that age (16 or 17). Some are... but not enough to warrant changing the voting age.
And manipulation by parents is highly likely. I know some people over the age of 21 who are manipulated into voting for who their parents say to vote for. Many people around my age group 18-24 aren't mature enough to be allowed to vote. If we change the limits at all, we should raise the age of military service and voting to 21. We should have one all-purpose limit for voting, drinking, military service, and entering into contracts. I'm fine with 18 being that age. I figure after high school, you are capable enough to do what you want. But not before.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
also, if you live at home and our dependent on your parents
you aren't responsible enough to vote
JM
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001 time: 00:20
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker
This is better for democracy as well. You'd end up with far more voting 18 year olds because they'd be used to it from earlier. It would also probably vastly decrease the number of people who are just ignorant about the issues - because they'd start being exposed in a meaningful way during a time when they're in a concentrated learning environment - also at the same time as they start to really be taught American history and government. |
But that argument holds just as well, if not better, for 18 year olds who just finished studying American history and government over a longer period of time. In any case, your argument also works for 14 year olds. Why don't you lower the voting age to 14? How about even lower than that?
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
The diplomat
|
 |
Terre Haute, IN USA
Sep 1999 time: 23:20
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Sava
If 16-17 year olds are going to complain about paying taxes and not having a vote, then perhaps we should make it illegal for them to work (then they don't have to worry about paying taxes). 
Society has deemed that 18 is the arbitrary age where kids become mature enough to enter into contracts, vote, etc... It may be arbitrary, but since there is no fair way to judge maturity, we need that arbitrary limit. I disagree with letting kids vote because they aren't mature at that age (16 or 17). Some are... but not enough to warrant changing the voting age.
And manipulation by parents is highly likely. I know some people over the age of 21 who are manipulated into voting for who their parents say to vote for. Many people around my age group 18-24 aren't mature enough to be allowed to vote. If we change the limits at all, we should raise the age of military service and voting to 21. We should have one all-purpose limit for voting, drinking, military service, and entering into contracts. I'm fine with 18 being that age. I figure after high school, you are capable enough to do what you want. But not before. |
We must have entered the Twilight Zone or something. Not just Sava makes perfect sense but I agree 100% with every word he just said.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote: Originally posted by OzzyKP
There is no requirement voters be smart, educated, literate or even sane. |
Put those requirements in place and I'll support lowering the voting age.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote: Originally posted by OzzyKP
Fine by me. You do realize however, that half or more of the adult population would be disenfranchised. |
Not a problem as far as I'm concerned. We can all do without idiots at the polling booth.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001 time: 00:20
|
|
It also seems that Kuci is projecting his experiences onto those of all other 16 year olds. Isn't he going to some super-elite proto-nerd school?
Kuci - what percentage of 16 year olds across America take AP anything?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001 time: 00:20
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker
No, the argument doesn't, for several reasons:
1) college students don't necessarily take any government courses at all
2) not all 18 year olds go to college (all but a very few 16 year olds are in high school)
3) 16 year olds are actively studying it in a coordinated environment - their learning about the stuff during the election. Not only would it increase interest in the election, because it's relevant to what they're doing in class, but it would increase interest in the class, because it's relevant to the election in which they can actually participate. |
To more directly respond to this:
1) What does college have to do with this? Eighteen is generally when you graduate high school. Given that elections are held in November, most 18 year olds will have just graduated from high school, full to the brim with all the knowledge from your AP courses. 
2) What does this have to do with anything?
3) Again, it would appear that most 16 year olds are not studying it. And you don't go changing ages of consent, voting, or anything because it might increase interest in a high school class. Of all the piss poor reasons to do something, this one ranks just above "because I want it".
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20. Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|