The Instigator
huntabby
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Carher165
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

The voting age should be reduced to 16

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Carher165
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/3/2016 Category: People
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 382 times Debate No: 92299
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)

 

huntabby

Pro

If you can legally work at 16 and be taxed, you should be able to vote. The fact that 16 year olds who are legally working are unable to vote is taxation without representation and is unconstitutional. Many 16 year olds would be more than capable of handling this responsibility.
Carher165

Con

No, the voting age should not be reduced to 16. I agree with you when you said that is unconstitutional be paying taxes without representation, but this situation must be resolved since a reform of the quantity or kind of taxes that the under 16 should pay.
The voting age was set pretending that people would be able to make an analytical election. A random person at age of 16 generally is starting to know how the world works and what to look for in life. Their opinion might be easily influenced by false arguments and the campings could be measured by a lack of truthful proposals.
Debate Round No. 1
huntabby

Pro

While it's true a 16 year old could easily be swayed, I know many adults who have little to no political and economic knowledge. There are plenty of adults who are extremely ignorant. Why should they vote and not a 16 year old?
Carher165

Con

I agree that there are adults who have little knowledge about politics, but the majority, are more analytical and have more experience to take a decisi"n. And also, there are 16 years old guys with an extraordinary political sense, but those are the minority.
But, you can not determine case by case who is able to make an intelligent choice. So you have to appeal to well defined segmentations, in this case, by age, and by majorities or average.
Debate Round No. 2
huntabby

Pro

The large majority of teenagers who would be voting would at least do some research though. Many adults vote solely based on political party. The fact still remains that 16 year olds are being taxed without representation which is unconstitutional. In order for 16 year olds to be taxed, they need to be able to vote for representatives that represent their interests and they currently cannot do that.
Carher165

Con

Same argument, same answer: I agree with you when you said that is unconstitutional be paying taxes without representation, but this situation must be resolved since a reform of the quantity or kind of taxes that the under 16 should pay.
The average teenagers has not showed to be enough rational or knower about politics and how does the world work.
If you suggest something to change the status quo you should show some objetive evidence that support your argument.
And I repeat, the main point to set the age to be able to vote are not the taxes, is the maturity of people.
Regards.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by whiteflame 11 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: parkerwil// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Con had more convincing arguments. Pro could do not have sustainable points as Con proved them wrong. Con also repeated himself in two rounds.

[*Reason for removal*] The voter is required to assess specific points made in the debate by both sides. Merely stating that one side repeated themselves and "could do not have sustainable points" is not sufficient.
************************************************************************
Posted by donthatethedebate 11 months ago
donthatethedebate
This whole argument is pointless. You have no right for "no taxation without representation" when you consent to work under age 18 and therefore surrender your rights.
Posted by Wylted 11 months ago
Wylted
It should be raised to 35.
Posted by corporealbeing 11 months ago
corporealbeing
Only if all voters had to take a political knowledge test.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Wylted 11 months ago
Wylted
huntabbyCarher165Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro argues that it is unconstitutional to tax without representation. I disagree with this but con concedesnthis point and offers a counter plan to not tax minors. Pro fails to show why the counterplan would not work as well. Con argued that 16 year olds are typically not knowledgable about politics, which was already addressed by pro when pro stated that many adults also are ignorant of politics. However Con wins on these grounds because he pointed out that we cannot eliminate everyone who is bad from voting, so we havebto focus on these age Demographics. Pro never challenges that argument, so it stands. Congrats on arguments con.