TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Fresh New Subject!

Fresh New Subject!

WEll, this might be a welcome break, although it probably only applies to the US

anyone can join in though!

what do u guys think about lowering the voting age to 16 (which happens to be my age?)

for non americans: at the moment, all american citizens can vote at 18 years of age. it was changed during the vietnam war from the age of 21 because there were 18 year olds in the war said "if we can fight, we can vote!"

so, go ahead, let ur opinions out...and if there if flaming on this thread omfg :/

Something is wrong when you can legally vote on the courses and entire country can take at the age of 16 and not drink alcohol for another 5 years till your 21 (this was the drinking age in US last time I checked).

I think voting should be left at 18. Heck most people don't even have a clue at 18, nevermind at 16.

Re: Fresh New Subject!

quote:

Originally posted by PhaseFour WEll, this might be a welcome break, although it probably only applies to the US anyone can join in though! what do u guys think about lowering the voting age to 16 (which happens to be my age?) for non americans: at the moment, all american citizens can vote at 18 years of age. it was changed during the vietnam war from the age of 21 because there were 18 year olds in the war said "if we can fight, we can vote!" so, go ahead, let ur opinions out...and if there if flaming on this thread omfg :/

Big mistake. I don't think 16 year olds are mature enough to make those kinds of decisions. I don't even think they are mature enough to drive. The driving age should be raised to 18 and the drinking age should be lowered to 18. If you're old enough to live on your own and you've completed your schooling, you're old enough to do anything.

isn't the enrollment age 17 in the US?

it makes me think about the same debate here in my province, what a joke man. Even 18 isn't old enough IMO.

PhaseFour, no offense to you..but I dont think people are mature enough at that age to vote. IMO, 18 is the prime age...cuz at that age most of us are educated about whats going on and the issues that are at hand. At that age, we actually start giving a shit out things we never did when we were younger

quote:

Originally posted by ahlamalek isn't the enrollment age 17 in the US? it makes me think about the same debate here in my province, what a joke man. Even 18 isn't old enough IMO.

Nope it's 18 I believe. I kinda agree with the 18 thing. You should be allowed to do whatever you want whenever you move out of the house and live on your own. I think that at that point do you truly understand responsibility.

16 is way too early. Even 18 is sort of young. When I was 16, I did think 16 year olds should be given the right to vote, but as time passed by, I realized how immature I was at that point. I'd say when you're about 20, you start to realize how the world works. And some, like tiesto14, don't get it even when they're 26.

But, although most people become able to reason maturely at about 20, it isn't the same for all of them. My opinion on the voting is that every person who wants to vote should be obligated to take a general political knowledge test, and also a psychological profile test. If that person passes both tests, he/she should be allowed to vote regardless of age.

NOOOO WAY. NOt that it makes a difrence anyway. IM still sure that the last election was rigged when there was all that recounting ballot BS going on I couldnt belive that shit was hapening.

quote:

Originally posted by Nalin Something is wrong when you can legally vote on the courses and entire country can take at the age of 16 and not drink alcohol for another 5 years till your 21 (this was the drinking age in US last time I checked).

hehehe, then this almost guarantees that the 16-20 year old voter will be sober at the polls, =P

anyways, i read some stats on voting in america... something like 200 million people of voting age, but only 150 million registered voters... AND in elections of 2000, only 100 million of those registered voters actually came out to vote. so only 3/4 of eligible voters in america even bothered to register, and then only 2/3 of those registered bothered to get up of their asses and vote. seems like only 1/2 of voting age citizens in america care enough about their country to choose its leadership and policies. that's pretty sad and i'm sure voters in canada are almost just as apathetic. anyways, the point is, lowering the voting age will do nothing except increase the percentage of unconcerned voters... i know when i first got to voting age, i was really tempted to vote for the marijuana party just for jokes... lowering voting age will invite dumbasses like me to throw away votes to extremist political factions.

nah..lets keep it at 18 - the age of "adulthood". and while we're at it, might as well lower the drinkig age to 18 though.

>JM<

quote:

Originally posted by mr. poopyhead seems like only 1/2 of voting age citizens in america care enough about their country to choose its leadership and policies. that's pretty sad and i'm sure voters in canada are almost just as pathetic.

U place blame on the voters. I place blame on the running partys. All of which offer nothing in the way of a reason to vote. And the whole procces of running for office is soooooo pathetic and insulting to voters with the amount of P.R. generated photo opps going on ever scince TV became popular. These things happen to make 1/2 of the poeple sick. Hence no votes. I am one of them and shall never vote.

unless of course we get a party who understands that everything comes down to money AND THAT RELIGION AND STATE ARE SEPERATE!!@! FFS!

quote:

Originally posted by Mental Exodus U place blame on the voters. I place blame on the running partys. All of which offer nothing in the way of a reason to vote. And the whole procces of running for office is soooooo pathetic and insulting to voters with the amount of P.R. generated photo opps going on ever scince TV became popular. These things happen to make 1/2 of the poeple sick. Hence no votes. I am one of them and shall never vote. unless of course we get a party who understands that everything comes down to money AND THAT RELIGION AND STATE ARE SEPERATE!!@! FFS!

i love how you edited my quote, =P

what you say is true, a lot of the time, politicians may not have a platform that suits us. it may seem issues like east coast fisheries and BC logging has nothing to do with us (mostly students) but at the same time, many issues will arise later that require good leadership... even if a politician isn't tacking issues that affect us now, its important to vote for someone who will make the right choices later. i know the photo ops and the staged events are sickening, but every politician does it. i used to not give a shit about voting as well, but i'm not gonna pass up my next chance to choose our country's leader. i'm not saying you're wrong in abstaining from voting, or that i'm better than you or anything like that but remember, if you waive your right to vote, then you also waive your right to criticize the people in power later...

It shouldn't be age-based at all, you should have to pass a voter-aptitude test which ensures you have sufficient knowledge of relevant issues and decent reasoning skills.

Generalities based on age are no better than generalities based on race or gender. They're an insult to the human condition, completely incompatible with any notion of civilization.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter It shouldn't be age-based at all, you should have to pass a voter-aptitude test which ensures you have sufficient knowledge of relevant issues and decent reasoning skills. Generalities based on age are no better than generalities based on race or gender. They're an insult to the human condition, completely incompatible with any notion of civilization.

it shouldn't be age based, you're right, but ideally shouldn't voting be open to ALL citizens regardless of knowledge, and "decent reasoning skills"?

i'm all for your idea, i think it's excellent. but isn't it also undemocratic to exclude certain people based on some arbitrary definition of "decent reasoning skills"? and what would classify as relevant issues? what's important to me may not be important to you...

here's an interesting report on voter apathy in canada:
http://www.elections.ca/loi/tur/tud/TurnoutDecline.pdf

i haven't read it all yet, but i will, =P.

quote:

Originally posted by mr. poopyhead it shouldn't be age based, you're right, but ideally shouldn't voting be open to ALL citizens regardless of knowledge, and "decent reasoning skills"? i'm all for your idea, i think it's excellent. but isn't it also undemocratic to exclude certain people based on some arbitrary definition of "decent reasoning skills"? and what would classify as relevant issues? what's important to me may not be important to you... here's an interesting report on voter apathy in canada: http://www.elections.ca/loi/tur/tud/TurnoutDecline.pdf i haven't read it all yet, but i will, =P.

It is not undemocratic to exclude people based on their reasoning skills. Not more undemocratic than having a voting age at least. Every normal person has the ability to learn enough to become a voter. And if a person is really unable to learn/understand how the world works, then of course that person shouldn't be allowed to vote. A retarded person shouldn't be allowed to have an influence on situations it doesn't understand. Relevant issues would be general knowledge of local and world politics and economy. It shouldn't be a very strict test, but enough to make those people who have no idea what the world's really like unable to vote.

very nice points everyone! good that theres no flaming hehe

well anyway, i also oppose lowering the voting age. and no, i dont take any offense to the fact that i am 16 or anything.

oh and to add to the discussion, i took a more legal/constitutional perspective to this. not to say that the points u guys are wrong or anything...just a different stance.

so, we look at the us constitution...many of the amendments relate to suffrage of some kinds...same with US history. so, groups of people who were "voting-opressed" (for lack of a better term), and how they were solved.

people who werent wealthy white landowners- fixed by the whole notion of jacksonian democracy.

women (although i think we should repeal this : jp )- constitutional amendment

blacks- constitutional amendment

18 year olds- suffered from the vietnam "symbolic opression" thing...imo 18 year olds sholdnt vote, but they at least had some sort of an argument..- fixed by constitutional amendment

anyway

1) sounds trent lottian, but shifting the votes to 16 year olds would obviously require some sort of constitutional amendment. people who have taken US history, you know how difficult this is. i just feel that government shouldnt waste time on something as dumb as this, esp with war in iraq, budget deficits, and stuff like that.

2) i see no reason why 16 year olds have a big reason to vote/ amend the constitution. obciously, blacks argue on the basis of race, and women argue on the basis of sex quality. the vietnam boys at least had some sort of an argument. but theres no really dominant point on why 16 year olds should deserve extended suffrage imv...which leads to point 3

3) by giving 16 year olds the vote now, imv, it creates a pretty dangerous constitutional precedent. as i said before, theres no really overriding reason why they shold be given the vote anyway. but if they were...20 years from now, could 14 year olds be able to vote? yeah, we all no theres no reason in hell why aaplz and his 14 year old goons should be given suffrage, but they can persuasively argue that because 16 year olds also have no reason to vote, and were given the ability to do so, a 14 year old should too. of course, this argument is dead when someone mentions why a 16 year old should vote, but its not clear right now

so anyway, good points people, and please also look at my stance

~4

WHAT?

A non-Iraq thread????

Get out of here!!!!!!!!

Age is nothing more than a number. Lets face it there are some 12 year olds more responsible than some 18 year olds. Age however is the only real way to quintify maturity though because any form of test is subjective at best. So I think 18 is fine, though sometimes I wonder if voting rights should be taken away from some people(maybe sex offenders, people with multiple felonys, other random stuff)

quote:

So I think 18 is fine, though sometimes I wonder if voting rights should be taken away from some people(maybe sex offenders, people with multiple felonys, other random stuff)

I agree, those people shouldn't be allowed to vote at all.

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 I agree, those people shouldn't be allowed to vote at all.

US law:
All felony convictions lead to the loss of voting rights. This means even if these persons serve their time in the county jail, part of their sentence under home monitoring, or on parole, they still may not vote until their rights are restored by the courts.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.