Should children be allowed to vote

Post Reply New Topic

Given that aspies are children at heart, I think that discrimination of adults against children is similar to discrimination of NT-s against aspies. True, children might not be as knowledgeable as adults are, but at the same time adults are blinded by biases that children don't have yet. So who is to say which of these two outweight the other? So both should have the same vote and this is the nature of democracy. But unfortuantely adults see children as outsiders much like NT-s see aspies as such and that is why it is overlooked.

No. They lack experience.

But is it really a bad thing? In many cases experience leads to bias.

Definitely not! They lack experience, they lack knowledge, they lack understanding, they lack just about all characteristics on average that a good voter is supposed to have.

To claim that children do not have bias and cannot be manipulated by pretty rhetoric is overlooking the nature of children, children will tend more strongly towards idealism and radical change than adults with less understanding of how or why things work the way that they do, thus making them perhaps more biased in a manner that is more dangerous.


This is not an issue of oppression vs democracy, but rather of a working system. Democracy is not necessarily the goal but rather the means of obtaining it, so democratic action can righteously be restricted if it is in the best interests of society.
I don't think that this is necessarily true, the average child is not so bitter as I am, nor as bitter as many of the aspies here. We may have childlike characteristics but our pursuit of knowledge and interests seem very not-childlike to me.

No. Wait until they are 18. Then they can vote in whichever stupid authoritarian centrist system they choose.

Most adults are just as apathetic and uninformed as children so why not?Liberal democracy is overated.....Like Tequila said you're just voting for mediocrity.

Most adults thankfully do not vote, the only thing is that children have a greater likelihood of not being informed than the average adult and as such I see no reason to extend to them the right to vote. To be honest, I would not mind restrictions on voting in order to require that voters have some knowledge on how the world works, the issue with that ends up being to easily corruption and enforcing a status quo. I do take solace in the fact that the voting public is smarter than the public at large.

So do aspies. For instance, I am 27, but due to my Asperger I never watch TV, don't listen to radio, don't talk to anyone cause I don't have friends. I am just sitting in my room and focuse on studies. Thats why I am saying that discrimination of aspies and discrimination of children is so similar. Most of my social mistakes are probably due to the fact that I never had a chance to experience a real world. So if it is okay to discriminate against children based on lack of experience then it is also okay to discriminate against aspies.



Are you sure that idealism is more dangerous? Actually I think that due to the fact that adults LACK idealism they have a lot of doulbe standards. They apply one set of principles to the political party and/or group of people they like and the other set of principles to the one they hate. That is because neither set of principles is taken to its idealistic extreme. But if you take the little children who are idealistic, if they believe in moral principle they would REALLY believe it, and use it for EVERYONE. Thus little children will be immuned from bias. Little children will be the ones who would REALLY believe in their ideals, while adults are the ones who don't believe in anything but merely pick and choose what to USE to further their own agenda which makes them sound so hypocritical. I would definitely be in favor of idealism over bias.



So what do you mean by working system? I am sure you will agree that the definition of working system is an equation where one part of the equation is whether or not ppl have enough to eat, but the other part of the equation is whether or not they are happy. Part of being happy is to feel like a human being equal to everyone else. So, yes, democracy IS part of the goal. If you are going to cross democracy out of your list of goals, then the only thing left would be whether or not they have enough to eat. So in other words the goal is to eat while democracy is merely means. So are you saying that it is okay for people to feel subhuman as long as they have enough to eat? That is definitely something I won't agree with. What is the goal of eating? The goal of eating is to live. And why live if you don't enjoy life to the fullest? And how can you enjoy it if you feel like second class citizen? I remember when I was a child I definitely resented the fact that i weren't allowed to vote.



Being resentful is not part of Asperger, it is the consequence of reaction of the NT-s on your Asperger. And the reason NT-s aren't accepting of aspies is due to the fact that aspies are like little kids.

...why, kids go to school and have social studies at least. Most adults are far removed from school.

Many kids pay taxes (working ones do anyway) and at least in the US I remember an old line about, "No taxation without represenation." Do you think the average person in the 18th century was more informed about politics then the average 16 year old today. Just imagine the shift in power that it could cause though, even if only 5% voted that would be enough people to turn many elections.

*snicker* You are quite right my friend. Except one problem. People of ALL ages lack knowledge and understanding Everyone dosn't have a single clue what's going around them at one point or anouther. To lack is to not have. We don't have knowlage of everything there is to know, kiddo. It's not nessasary a bad thing eather. It would be no fun to not ponder stuff endlessly for ages, just how I'll probibly go about for most of my life, would it? However, your absolutly correct on the experience. Kids and teens, including I, are a bunch of cute little ol' kooks with much to find out. We think we are mature, and overlook our problems. They think they are doing just fine, and fail to look at what they need to correct. It's true for myself as well. That's why we need to leave it up to the elders
to decide amongst themselves and their peers.

Most certainly not. I'll admit that children are a lot smarter and wiser than most adults give them credit for, but their ideals are too fickle for anyone to be able to take their political insights seriously. Does anybody really want to see a twelve year old running for mayor, governor, or president? If you wouldn't give children the right to run for public office, why would you want them voting? It's true that there's no magical age at which a person gains all the knowledge and wisdom needed to vote, but for the sake of efficiency, the line has to be drawn somewhere, and eighteen years seems like a reasonable place to draw it.

Along those lines, it makes sense that an American president must not only be an adult, but be at least forty-five years old. You don't want a president who flip-flops, and people tend to do that in their youth, but the older you get, the less likely you are to change, and who you are when you're forty-five is probably who you'll be for the rest of your life.

This is not restricted to kids. Adults do that too. If they didn't, we won't have any of teh worlds problems we are dealing with. In fact adults are worse than kids in this respect because they don't have teachers to remind them that they need more learning to do. The only reason why you don't know about it is that you are so used to it that you regard it as normal. But the very phenomenon that the adult kind of games are regarded more normal than child kind of games is what gives adults power. We all know what happends when one is elected into the office and has power. So what makes you think that it is any different from adults who get more power upon crossing 18 year old line? Adults are jsut grown up kids.

So you said no one can take their political insights seriously. Fine. But why does it implies that their political insides are bad? Einstein's theory was only taken seriously by 12 people but it turned out to be the best idea of the 20-th century. OF COURSE children aren't taken serously, otherwise they would of been allowed to vote, so there would be no point of this post. My point is to CHALLENGE people for not taking their ideas seriously.



By teh same logic you shouldn't allow anyone under 45 to vote since you can't run for president until you are 45.

I perfectly understand that adults also do the same, Roman. That's what politicians are for
But, adults do mess up alot less then kids and definitly less then teens.
Adult challenge our thoughts not becuse they seem immature, but becuse we will change as we get older.
We all have things we have regretted in our life that didn't bother us at the time in our childhood. It's a fact.
Hormones are strange little buggers. They make your brain act much diffrent in subtle ways.
You won't even know what'll hit you Teens, including I, have this same problem.
Our thoughts should be respected and all, but to a certain point.

Oh, and although it would be nice and I wouldn't mind if they all poofed one day, it wouldn't be as much interesting as it would if they had them. Nobody's perfect. And as teens such as myself relise this, they go into a mood where they argue much like you (No offence at all) I gone into one like that myself, but much earlier then some. I picked up litter, did my best to help animals, and yelled at poor unsuspecting peers. Otherwords, I was a enviromentalist. But eventually, I gotten out of that and returned to my computer fandom. Adults everywhere miss those days, but they had their fun

Polititians mess up MORE than kids or teens. The mess the world is in right now is the doing of adults, while whatever the problems we have with teens is way down the list.



The question is not why they challenge the thought of children. The question is why don't they challenge the thought of other adults just as much? If your argument is that children are the only ones who will change, this would again imply that adults are worse, since they have less of ability to change.



Adults do, too. Take the fact that half of the marriages end up in divorce.



Adults have hormones too. What you are saying is that adults hormons are DIFFERENT than kids are. But the fact that it is different biology doesn't change the fact that it is biology just as much.



You are a living proof for the contrary. You are the first person I ever talked to who admits of having this kind of problem. This proves that you are much more honest about who you are than most people. And hey you are a teen:)



I agree NOBODY is perfect -- neither teens nor adults. So thats why I don't see a point of saying that teens and kids are the only ones who isn't perfect.



I am 27, although I agree that I am much younger than my age so psychologically I am still a teen.

But anyway, I believe arguing is a good thing. I argue because I don't like all the prejudice that is being taken for granted. So if teens argue more than adults, it means that adults are more prejudiced than teens. Both prejudice and rebellure is a problem, but between the two I would personally choose rebellure because we have way too much prejudice these days.



See, this just confirms my point that some kids are better than most adults. A lot of adults won't care about any of these, and just want $$$ in their pockets.