Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The same reason that a knuckle dragging birther who doesn't believe in evolution can cancel my vote, Democracy.
I know, some people hate it, but it's the best game in town.
Is it the best game in town? The founders of this country only wanted to allow male land-owners to vote. For a very long time, the voting age was higher than it is today. And historically, a fully representative democracy hasn't exactly been shown to produce the best results.
There is no reason to believe that allowing "knuckle dragging birthers" the right to vote is doing this country any good. Just like allowing ignorant entitlement lovers the right to vote isn't doing this country any good either.
My point is, what is the principle behind preventing those ignorant people from being able to vote through a basic civics knowledge test(as long as all test materials are available to all). When we already have a history of preventing the young from engaging in politics for much the same purpose of the test.
if the intention of a voting-age is to prevent ignorant and easily manipulated people from voting, then why is requiring a basic knowledge test before voting any different?
Voting age is based upon what is essentially an arbitrary chronological point in which a society determines when a minor reaches the age of majority. That point in which they are responsible for their own actions and while we would like to believe of expect that wisdom accompanies reaching the age of majority it certainly is not a certainty. The reason that the voting age was lowered to 18 was the logical reasoning that if an 18 year old was old enough to sacrifice the life in the service of their country, then wisdom or not, they had a right to participate in the body politic that determines when and where that sacrifice might take place.
As for test to establish voting rights, well the history of that tool is rather clear. Historically such test were not to determine wisdom or even knowledge of the workings of the American government but to exclude individuals from participating in the civic life of the country despite the fact that they had reached the age of majority. Those test were applied discriminately and their is little basis to argue that such a pattern of discrimination would be applied again. So we weigh the cost and benefits of allowing the age of majority as being the criteria to decide who can participate and who can not. We weighted in favor of greater not less participation in the democratic process. It is has been a wise and prudent choice.
PS - based upon the arguments that I've read regarding how government works and the meaning of the Constitution coming from right-wing sources, I would be careful what one wishes for.
PS - based upon the arguments that I've read regarding how government works and the meaning of the Constitution coming from right-wing sources, I would be careful what one wishes for.
Tying Constitutional literacy to voting would be detrimental to the GOP and effectively destroy the tea party.
No need to single out the tea party. Plenty of ignorant people in many parties, both right and left.
That is basically my point. It reminds me of all the polls you see in the news. They take polls one week, and the majority of Americans approve of the presidents healthcare plan. Then the next week, it has gone the other way. Because ignorant people are easily manipulated and controlled by the media, and that is exactly what we have now. And I just do not see the purpose of allowing ignorance, which is easily manipulated, to have control over our political system. Regardless of which parties it comes from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
Voting age is based upon what is essentially an arbitrary chronological point in which a society determines when a minor reaches the age of majority. That point in which they are responsible for their own actions and while we would like to believe of expect that wisdom accompanies reaching the age of majority it certainly is not a certainty. The reason that the voting age was lowered to 18 was the logical reasoning that if an 18 year old was old enough to sacrifice the life in the service of their country, then wisdom or not, they had a right to participate in the body politic that determines when and where that sacrifice might take place.
The primary motivation for the lowering of the age to 18 had to do with the draft(Vietnam era). But, if a presidential term is four years, then potentially a 15-year-old could even be affected by the draft. So, does that mean a 15-year-old should be allowed the right to vote?
Quote:
As for test to establish voting rights, well the history of that tool is rather clear. Historically such test were not to determine wisdom or even knowledge of the workings of the American government but to exclude individuals from participating in the civic life of the country despite the fact that they had reached the age of majority. Those test were applied discriminately and their is little basis to argue that such a pattern of discrimination would be applied again. So we weigh the cost and benefits of allowing the age of majority as being the criteria to decide who can participate and who can not. We weighted in favor of greater not less participation in the democratic process. It is has been a wise and prudent choice.
I completely understand that many of the voting requirements were intended to prevent civic involvement of certain groups. But I personally believe that much of the effects of such policies were greatly exaggerated.
For instance, voting is completely free today, yet certain groups are far less likely to engage in politics than other groups. The progressives like to hold up disparities between groups as proof of some evil conspiracy out to hurt one group or another. But that is rarely the case.
There is no reason to believe that a standardized basic civics knowledge test would produce some insidiously biased results. Though I would concur, that I have no doubt it would have more of an effect on certain groups. But that I would also assume that it would correlate more highly with educational attainment, rather than race/ethnicity.
Why do you have to get all smarty pants and bring out scientific terms?
You are just confusing me man.
Because most people in this forum think I'm a knuckle dragging neanderthal. Like to pitch a change up across the plate every inning or so just to keep it interesting. I wonder how many people will actually read my link. Just the smart ones I guess.
Welcome to the club.
The primary motivation for the lowering of the age to 18 had to do with the draft(Vietnam era). But, if a presidential term is four years, then potentially a 15-year-old could even be affected by the draft. So, does that mean a 15-year-old should be allowed the right to vote?
Oh, for goodness sake. There IS no draft, hon. There hasn't been one since the early 1970s.
Just sayin'...for someone arguing that the uninformed shouldn't be allowed to vote...well...you get it, I'm sure.
Oh, for goodness sake. There IS no draft, hon. There hasn't been one since the early 1970s.
Just sayin'...for someone arguing that the uninformed shouldn't be allowed to vote...well...you get it, I'm sure.
I don't quite understand your point. There is no draft today, but the Supreme Court already ruled that the draft is perfectly constitutional. Which means at any time the draft could come back.
Secondly, the voting age was reduced from 21 to 18 as a direct result of there being a draft for Vietnam. Had there not been the Vietnam draft, there is no reason to believe that the voting age still wouldn't be 21.
If we are going to suddenly concede that the perfect age requirement for voting is 18 because of the past existence of the draft(or its potential in the future). Then my second argument was that, 16(14-15-17)-year-olds could potentially be affected by the draft over the course of a presidents term. Yet they are denied the right to vote.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
