• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Children's Suffrage

I have something with a little more finality in mind. Not that you'll appreciate it right now, but history will record that you stood in the way.

Wouldn't wanna be you when the not so fair sex finds out. :lol:

That makes no sense! :lamo
 
It's not a joke, dude, I honestly have no clue what you're talking about. :shrug:

Tell you what man, you win. Have a nice day.
Alright, dude. Peace.
 
1. Oh hell no. We have enough trouble with low-information voters as it is.


2. Pointless... very few 18-22yo's bother to vote NOW... so few that politicos don't even really try to pander to that demographic... so it wouldn't accomplish much.


3. Oh hell no.... if you let 7yo's vote, they're going to vote for no homework, no bedtimes and free candy. That would work out REAL well right?? :roll:
 
The biggest argument against children voting is that they lack the information necessary to make an informed decision. When I was a little kid my mom made me go to church. I also had to frequently read the bible and pray. If kids had been allowed to vote back then...then she probably would have dragged me to the voting booth and tried to make me vote like her as well...fiscally liberal and socially conservative. Make some noise if you're fiscally liberal and socially conservative. I'm not...I'm the opposite...and I've been an atheist since the age of 11.

And you are now 13?

If you want to argue that kids don't understand the issues...then you're arguing that parents don't understand the issues. Therefore, you're arguing that parents should not be allowed to vote.

Kids don't understand the issue and that means that the parents don't understand the issue? Want to run the logic of that one past me please...

Kids shouldn't be allowed to vote because they don't have enough life experience? Therefore, those of you who have never lived in a developing country should not be allowed to vote. Same thing with those of you who haven't experienced war first hand.

Never been in a war, haven't lived in a developing country = being like a kid. Sounds about right... :lol:

Therefore, either everybody votes or nobody votes. If there's value in allowing some people to vote...then we maximize value by allowing everybody to vote.


Therefore? Have you made a valid point or something? I think that I missed it...

Another argument is that people with kids would have more influence than people without kids. So what? Then you're arguing that the 1% shouldn't be allowed to vote because they have more money (influence) than the 99%.



Voting is a numbers game. Kids, being in the minority, even in the unlikely situation that they all agreed on the same issue...would never have the numbers to win against adults. Not only would kids not have the numbers...but they wouldn't even have the dollars. So they would get trounced in any kid vs adult issue.



Clearly though, just because people vote for the "wrong" thing isn't any evidence that they shouldn't be allowed to vote. Otherwise women shouldn't be allowed to vote...given that they voted for prohibition.



The fact that so many of you believe that kids shouldn't be allowed to vote...is proof positive that kids should be allowed to vote.
 
1. Oh hell no. We have enough trouble with low-information voters as it is.

What trouble? They vote for things that are against your own personal interests?

As a pragmatarian I don't support children's suffrage because it would help my cause. I support it because everybody should have the right to try and protect their interests...even if their interests are diametrically opposed to my own.

If it was easy for people to step outside their own biases then universal suffrage wouldn't have been a struggle.
 
What trouble? They vote for things that are against your own personal interests?

As a pragmatarian I don't support children's suffrage because it would help my cause. I support it because everybody should have the right to try and protect their interests...even if their interests are diametrically opposed to my own.

If it was easy for people to step outside their own biases then universal suffrage wouldn't have been a struggle.

I don't think that you read what he said very well... try again. It deals with being informed of the issues, not what the voter votes for.
 
What trouble? They vote for things that are against your own personal interests?

As a pragmatarian I don't support children's suffrage because it would help my cause. I support it because everybody should have the right to try and protect their interests...even if their interests are diametrically opposed to my own.

If it was easy for people to step outside their own biases then universal suffrage wouldn't have been a struggle.


Well be prepared to pay taxes for free candy then, and everytime you tell LiL Janie to go to bed so she can get up for school the next day, expect her to call her Congressman and complain that her Mommy is a tyrant.

Puh-leese....
 
I don't think that you read what he said very well... try again. It deals with being informed of the issues, not what the voter votes for.

Can you offer some specific, tangible, credible and realistic examples of negative outcomes that would directly result from allowing children to vote?
 
Can you offer some specific, tangible, credible and realistic examples of negative outcomes that would directly result from allowing children to vote?

Maybe they need a diaper change and that would affect how they view the issues at that time. They could have a temper tantrum and break the voting machine. Maybe it is nap time and they are really sleepy and tick the wrong box. I can do this all day. Maybe they are upset that Elmo wasn't on or that Santa wasn't real. It could get in the way of cheerleading practice. Do you need more. The idea that children would understand the issues and vote accordingly is, literally, stupid.
 
People of any age should be allowed to vote. There should only be one restriction...

1. you can't be accompanied in the voting both

The biggest argument against children voting is that they lack the information necessary to make an informed decision. When I was a little kid my mom made me go to church. I also had to frequently read the bible and pray. If kids had been allowed to vote back then...then she probably would have dragged me to the voting booth and tried to make me vote like her as well...fiscally liberal and socially conservative. Make some noise if you're fiscally liberal and socially conservative. I'm not...I'm the opposite...and I've been an atheist since the age of 11.

So if you want to argue that kids wouldn't have enough information...then you're arguing that parents don't have enough information. Therefore, you're arguing that parents should not be allowed to vote.

If you want to argue that kids don't understand the issues...then you're arguing that parents don't understand the issues. Therefore, you're arguing that parents should not be allowed to vote.

Kids shouldn't be allowed to vote because they don't pay taxes? Therefore adults that don't pay taxes shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Kids shouldn't be allowed to vote because they don't have enough life experience? Therefore, those of you who have never lived in a developing country should not be allowed to vote. Same thing with those of you who haven't experienced war first hand.

Therefore, either everybody votes or nobody votes. If there's value in allowing some people to vote...then we maximize value by allowing everybody to vote.

Another argument is that people with kids would have more influence than people without kids. So what? Then you're arguing that the 1% shouldn't be allowed to vote because they have more money (influence) than the 99%.

Voting is a numbers game. Kids, being in the minority, even in the unlikely situation that they all agreed on the same issue...would never have the numbers to win against adults. Not only would kids not have the numbers...but they wouldn't even have the dollars. So they would get trounced in any kid vs adult issue.

Clearly though, just because people vote for the "wrong" thing isn't any evidence that they shouldn't be allowed to vote. Otherwise women shouldn't be allowed to vote...given that they voted for prohibition.

The fact that so many of you believe that kids shouldn't be allowed to vote...is proof positive that kids should be allowed to vote.

IF kids are allowed to vote are they also allowed to have sex, drink, smoke and drive, work (not go to school, try for military, live alone??) IF not then why not?

Also what is the cut of ages for "Kids" 1 year old, 2 year old? 5 year old? Are all allowed to vote? Are you arguing the 1 year old has the same intellectual capacity and 15 year old or even and adult?

Also why are you stopping at kids, how about Foreigners, tourist, people on business trips...Criminals are they also allowed to vote? If not Why Not? It is the number game as you say it so why not let them vote as well?

You also asserted that voting wrong (in your opinion and with a hindsight of today) somehow should preclude you from voting altogether...and your reasoning...THEY(meaning women) VOTED FOR PROHIBITION. And You logic....just because Women league supported prohibition (which actually is not accurate since there was deal making involved and not just blindly agreeing with Prohibition) but regardless you are assuming all Women everywhere in US unanimously voted for prohibition...even if you accept the asinine reasoning, men for far longer and far more frequently have voted for other things worst than prohibitions than women. So if anyone gender needs to be ban from voting due to irrational voting it is the men.

Diving Mullah
 
If we allow my senile grandma to vote, i don't see why minors shouldn't. I'd rather voting privileges were contingent on maintaining some kind of rational standard, like *before informed about anything related to the candidates' platforms and campaigns*. I've met too many minors who are far more responsible and capable than many adults for me to believe that age alone is an ideal prerequisite to voting.
 
Maybe they need a diaper change and that would affect how they view the issues at that time. They could have a temper tantrum and break the voting machine. Maybe it is nap time and they are really sleepy and tick the wrong box. I can do this all day. Maybe they are upset that Elmo wasn't on or that Santa wasn't real. It could get in the way of cheerleading practice. Do you need more. The idea that children would understand the issues and vote accordingly is, literally, stupid.

Do you understand the issues? Can you name the Nobel Prize winning liberal economist who provided the definitive theoretical justification for the public sector?
 
Do you understand the issues? Can you name the Nobel Prize winning liberal economist who provided the definitive theoretical justification for the public sector?

When am I voting on that issue? I don't vote on issues that I don't understand. I also don't vote in American politics for anything other than the Presidency.

Children voting is ridiculous... as I stated. Also, the human brain doesn't become, more or less, fully evolved until about 18 years of age or so. An adult would understand why kids shouldn't vote, especially a parent, psychologist or teacher. You are none of the three apparently.
 
When am I voting on that issue? I don't vote on issues that I don't understand. I also don't vote in American politics for anything other than the Presidency.

When are you voting on the justification for government? Every time you vote for the president. When Churchill said that the best argument against democracy was a 5 minute conversation with the average voter...he was talking about you.

Children voting is ridiculous... as I stated. Also, the human brain doesn't become, more or less, fully evolved until about 18 years of age or so. An adult would understand why kids shouldn't vote, especially a parent, psychologist or teacher. You are none of the three apparently.

A parent would understand it...therefore we shouldn't eliminate the age restriction? A parent would understand it but take their kids to go vote anyways?

Either parents understand it...or we need an age restriction...but it can't be both. Obviously I'm a teacher because here I am schooling you. If I was your parent then I wouldn't allow you to vote. Learn about the definitive economic justification for government and then you can go out and play.
 
Letting children have the right to vote could work if we treated children differently in general. Before industrialization, most children from the middle or lower classes were sent to work, often in the kinds of hazardous jobs that adults did. It was unethical, but one positive side to it was that children were treated like they were capable.

Then industrialization happened along with worker rights, and somehow removing children from the workforce came coupled with treating them like they are delicate, stupid little trickets whose innocence should be preserved for as long as possible. That's when they lost capability.

There's a lot that children aren't ready for such as sexual situations, but in many places around the world there is evidence that children can and do have political consciousness. I just don't think it's workable in the United States. A lot of adults have had their political consciousnes dumbed down and pacified by consumerism, the media, and partisan hackery, so naturally that will make children less aware now than ever.
 
1. Oh hell no. We have enough trouble with low-information voters as it is.

2. Pointless... very few 18-22yo's bother to vote NOW... so few that politicos don't even really try to pander to that demographic... so it wouldn't accomplish much.

3. Oh hell no.... if you let 7yo's vote, they're going to vote for no homework, no bedtimes and free candy. That would work out REAL well right?? :roll:
:lamo
 
When are you voting on the justification for government? Every time you vote for the president. When Churchill said that the best argument against democracy was a 5 minute conversation with the average voter...he was talking about you.

You have no argument and out of the blue you start with Ad Homs... the sign of a seriously weak debater. ...and no, I asked when I was voting on issues that I didn't understand and specifically about the guy who won the Nobel Prize.

A parent would understand it...therefore we shouldn't eliminate the age restriction? A parent would understand it but take their kids to go vote anyways?

Is English you second language or something? A parent understands why kids shouldn't vote. Stop convoluting things...

Either parents understand it...or we need an age restriction...but it can't be both. Obviously I'm a teacher because here I am schooling you. If I was your parent then I wouldn't allow you to vote. Learn about the definitive economic justification for government and then you can go out and play.

I don't need to learn about that... I understand the function and necessity of government quite well. I sure hope you aren't a teacher... at least not one that kids have to have mandatory attendance to. If you want to discus government let me know. I used to teach it back in the US for years. Doesn't make me an expert... and I play first. With my kids. Who at 9 and 10 could school you any day of the week. :lol:

Now, if you are actually an adult. Start acting like one. Back up your argument with some facts. So far, you have a convoluted opinion that kids should be able to vote but you are not addressing the emotional or psychological immaturity that kids posses and how/why that should be overlooked. You want to change the law then address why the law is in place.
 
Back
Top Bottom