Should 16 olds have the right to vote?

Post Reply New Topic

Consider the following:

- All "right" thinking people know that academia has been heavily infiltrated by left-leaning...err...academics...<facetious>
-Children's brains (if they have more than one) aren't fully developed...
-Overwhelmingly, young people are much more influenced by their less evolved emotional component than the more evolved neo-cortex...
-Left-wing politics tends to embrace emotional considerations over rational considerations...

<facetiosness mode activated moreso>

Conclusion:
Allowing pretend humans with half a brain which can be easily and cynically manipulated/brainwashed into embracing emotionalism over rationalism through political mind rape would favour the left of politics over the right...

<duck>
<weave>
<squawk>

Those damned sneaky lefties!

No they shouldn't lower the age to 16, but by the same token a lot of older people don't understand what they're voting for either.

The way I think they should do it is they should have some sort of test people have to take before they vote to prove they understand politics and have enough knowledge to make an educated decision on which party they'd prefer leading their country. Those who can't pass the test either don't get to vote or have their vote counted to a lesser degree than those who pass.

If a 16 year-old can pass a test like that, I see no reason not to let them vote. Especially if they have some kind of a job and are paying taxes.

Every Sperm is Sacred - Monty Python's The Meaning of Life

https://youtu.be/fUspLVStPbk

There is nothing magical that happens at 18

18, vote
16, drive
21 alcohol

In some countries it is different

Voting is much less dangerous than guns

Plenty of 16 year olds are more sophisticated than some 18 year olds

Age discrimination

There has to be a quota

But what the quota is, does not matter, that much



Some 16 year olds have children, jobs, whatever

I disagree, the act of voting is not dangerous, electing people who could damage the country is far more damaging than a gun. Communist regimes have proven just how harmful a government can be.

But most lack the life experience of a 25-year-old...

Also, consider:
You let in one more sophisticated 16-year-old and you let in the entire horde...no?
In addition: Most 18-year-olds have greater insight into life than when they were 16...
Dare I say: All?...

I think life experience is the key here. A lot happens between 18 and 25. Our society has changed and on average people live longer and do things later than they used to.

In 1971 when the 26th ammendment was passed the average age of marriage for women was 21 and for men was 23. Now it is 27 and 29 respectively.

The average age of having a first child was 24 in 1976. Now it is 27.

The average age of buying a first home was 24 in the UK in 1970, and is now 36(I couldn't find US stats, but I'm positive it shows a similar trend).

In 1974 56% of teens age 16-19 were employed during the summer. Now it is just 34%.

I could go on and on, but bottom line, 18 years old today have less life experience and development than 18 year olds in the 1970s. They have even less life experience than 21 year olds of the 1960s and 50s. It's my opinion that life experience is the determining factor for voting and 16 year olds these days don't have much. I'll reiterate if anything the age of voting should be increased (also increase the age of draft).

Interesting...

Respectfully I have to disagree about 18ers these days being less sophisticated than in the 70s...
Well, here in Australia at least...

The internet, social media, the plethora and frequency of news/current affairs programs, access to documentaries, etc has resulted in a much more informed youth than when I was a kid, imo...
I bemoan the fact that there was no access to on-line autism forums, for example, and general educational conduits when I was in my teens...
Life would have been so much "better" for me personally had there been...
And I wouldn't have been so isolated, something/k which ret*d my social and philosophical development...

You can apply these modern-day benefits to all young ppl these days (keeping the context of this discussion), surely...

Regardless:
16 is still too young to vote, imo...

There is a distinction between sophistication, and life experience. 18 year olds these days are more knowledgeable than ever, but less experienced than ever. It's the difference between "book smarts" and "street smarts" to an extent. Or in the modern era "computer smarts" and "life smarts." I'm very book smart. There is value to book smarts, but also limitation.

But there is value in human intuition. The human brain is vastly more intelligent than the most sophisticated computer built today. It learns so much from experience that can never be taught through theory. Things that work on paper don't always work in the real world.

The flip side is the human brain finds patterns in things that don't exist. I think ideally you have a mixture of theoretical understanding and practical experience. Age is a good predictor for the latter, but a poor predictor of the former.

Voting is a human right. Anyone who wants to vote should be allowed to vote. No exceptions.

Should a bunch of concerned global citizens be able to show up in the UK and vote up or down on things like Brexit?

Yea....even five year olds! That's a ridiculous argument. Voting isn't a human right, it's a right that is granted to people of a particular age which can be adjusted by voters.

Convicted felons


Undocumented immigrants

Or phrased in the terms of the U.S. Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator by certain inalienable rights, that among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Is depriving a person the right to vote an infringement on their life: no, no one dies from the act of not voting.

Is depriving a person the right to vote an infringement on their health: no, no one dies from the act of not voting.

Is depriving a person the right to vote an infringement on their liberty: Yes, but society infringes on person's liberties all the time. Felons do not have the right to vote, they also don't have the right to walk freely on the street. Children do not have the right to vote. They also do not have the right to drive cars, smoke cigarrettes, drink alcohol, in some localities be outdoors after 10 pm, in some localities purchase firearms. The right to liberty is not an absolute right, and as such we can not say that denying children, or foreign nationals the right to vote is out of line with other liberty infringements that society provides.

Is depriving a person the right to vote an infringment on their property: No, no one loses their property through the act of not voting.

To be clear by the act of voting, I mean literally the act of casting a vote. Obviously political governments can and do infringe on persons rights to life, liberty, and property, but this is distinct from the act of voting itself.

He was joking...
Well, I hope he waz...