Total Posts:36|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Voting age bump back up

Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 3:02:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I think we should bump the voting age up to 25 with the exceptions of those who have any one of the following:

1. Any graduate school degree from an accredited institution.
2. Regular 4-year college degree from the field of Political Science or Law.
3. Professional license issued by the State for any field of practice.

My purpose is to prevent young people who are inexperienced, poorly educated, or unemployed from voting.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 3:05:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 3:02:07 PM, Kleptin wrote:
I think we should bump the voting age up to 25 with the exceptions of those who have any one of the following:

1. Any graduate school degree from an accredited institution.
2. Regular 4-year college degree from the field of Political Science or Law.
3. Professional license issued by the State for any field of practice.

My purpose is to prevent young people who are inexperienced, poorly educated, or unemployed from voting.

I'd be okay with it, but be prepared to be called a racist.
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 3:12:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 3:05:22 PM, innomen wrote:
At 11/11/2010 3:02:07 PM, Kleptin wrote:
I think we should bump the voting age up to 25 with the exceptions of those who have any one of the following:

1. Any graduate school degree from an accredited institution.
2. Regular 4-year college degree from the field of Political Science or Law.
3. Professional license issued by the State for any field of practice.

My purpose is to prevent young people who are inexperienced, poorly educated, or unemployed from voting.

I'd be okay with it, but be prepared to be called a racist.

I'm more than okay with it, and I've been called much worse.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 3:14:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 3:05:22 PM, innomen wrote:
At 11/11/2010 3:02:07 PM, Kleptin wrote:
I think we should bump the voting age up to 25 with the exceptions of those who have any one of the following:

1. Any graduate school degree from an accredited institution.
2. Regular 4-year college degree from the field of Political Science or Law.
3. Professional license issued by the State for any field of practice.

My purpose is to prevent young people who are inexperienced, poorly educated, or unemployed from voting.

I'd be okay with it, but be prepared to be called a racist.

Racist!!!!
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 3:14:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 3:02:07 PM, Kleptin wrote:
I think we should bump the voting age up to 25 with the exceptions of those who have any one of the following:

1. Any graduate school degree from an accredited institution.
2. Regular 4-year college degree from the field of Political Science or Law.
3. Professional license issued by the State for any field of practice.

My purpose is to prevent young people who are inexperienced, poorly educated, or unemployed from voting.

I do have questions about number 3. Namely, why?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 3:55:46 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 3:02:07 PM, Kleptin wrote:
I think we should bump the voting age up to 25 with the exceptions of those who have any one of the following:

1. Any graduate school degree from an accredited institution.
2. Regular 4-year college degree from the field of Political Science or Law.
3. Professional license issued by the State for any field of practice.

My purpose is to prevent young people who are inexperienced, poorly educated, or unemployed from voting.

Then I wouldn't be able to vote. Fvck you.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Koopin
Posts: 12,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 4:02:51 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 4:00:05 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
As long as you bump up every other age (military service, drinking, smoking, consent, full criminal culpability, etc.) along with it.

Taxes!
kfc
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 4:02:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 3:58:10 PM, FREEDO wrote:
No taxation without representation.

Pretty much. It seems unfair to let politics influence those who can't participate in it. Of course you might point out that this applies to children as well, but let's avoid semantics in this regard or rather going OT since Kleptin is specifically referring to upping the current age from what it is now. I'd say it's a pretty shoddy idea, especially considering the obvious -- that plenty of adults don't know jack sh!t either.
President of DDO
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 4:05:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 4:02:51 PM, Koopin wrote:
At 11/11/2010 4:00:05 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
As long as you bump up every other age (military service, drinking, smoking, consent, full criminal culpability, etc.) along with it.

Taxes!

Indeed. Make sure you can't be taxed until 25, too; though, technically, that's unfair, since the young would probably be forced to work grueling hours since their income and such wouldn't be taxed. If that's true, you'd have to legislate a ban against formal employment effective until 25.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 4:09:50 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Personally, I would have it so no one under the voting age could be convicted of any crime. Naturally, the voting age would drop somewhere around 12, preferably.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 4:10:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 4:06:59 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
And I agree with L, since the irony is that most undergraduate students are more politically active/aware than most adults. :P

This is probably true.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 4:14:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
The theory behind democracy is that it will serve to have less exploitation between groups, not that the majority is smart. I think that's where Kleptin is off here. Closing off the vote to certain groups of people only causes more exploitative of them, whether the other people are smart or not.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 4:14:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 4:14:08 PM, FREEDO wrote:
The theory behind democracy is that it will serve to have less exploitation between groups, not that the majority is smart. I think that's where Kleptin is off here. Closing off the vote to certain groups of people only causes more exploitation of them, whether the other people are smart or not.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 4:58:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 3:55:46 PM, tvellalott wrote:
Then I wouldn't be able to vote. Fvck you.

Judging by your comments about the last election, why do you care? :P
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 5:06:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 4:58:54 PM, Puck wrote:
At 11/11/2010 3:55:46 PM, tvellalott wrote:
Then I wouldn't be able to vote. Fvck you.

Judging by your comments about the last election, why do you care? :P

If either side had had a remotely engaging leader or interesting campaign, I wouldn't have been so apathetic. But as someone who was born in, lives in, works in and loves this country, I deserve the right to vote.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 5:14:25 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 5:06:47 PM, tvellalott wrote:
If either side had had a remotely engaging leader or interesting campaign

Policies, not personality, make a government.
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 5:22:04 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 5:14:25 PM, Puck wrote:
At 11/11/2010 5:06:47 PM, tvellalott wrote:
If either side had had a remotely engaging leader or interesting campaign

Policies, not personality, make a government.

I thought force, fraud, and coercion make a government? :P
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 5:30:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 5:14:25 PM, Puck wrote:
At 11/11/2010 5:06:47 PM, tvellalott wrote:
If either side had had a remotely engaging leader or interesting campaign

Policies, not personality, make a government.

A leader is his or her parties policies. Also, people who are weak of character can hardly made assertive leaders, can they?
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2010 5:46:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 5:22:04 PM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 11/11/2010 5:14:25 PM, Puck wrote:
At 11/11/2010 5:06:47 PM, tvellalott wrote:
If either side had had a remotely engaging leader or interesting campaign

Policies, not personality, make a government.

I thought force, fraud, and coercion make a government? :P

Only the dark side of the force.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2010 1:46:07 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 3:58:10 PM, FREEDO wrote:
No taxation without representation.

Agreed.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2010 2:09:56 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 4:06:59 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
And I agree with L, since the irony is that most undergraduate students are more politically active/aware than most adults. :P

Active maybe; aware, very doubtful.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2010 4:36:31 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 3:02:07 PM, Kleptin wrote:

My purpose is to prevent young people who are inexperienced, poorly educated, or unemployed from voting.

"Inexperienced"? Inexperienced in what exactly? Dining in upscale restaurants, lodging in deluxe hotels and flying first class around the world, perhaps?

"Poorly-educated"? So people that didn't have rich mummies and daddies and therefore didn't have the opportunity to get a decent education should be penalized for their misfortune by having their right to vote denied them?

"Unemployed"? So if a young person grows up in a town where the area's main employer has closed down and thousands of skilled workers are thrown onto the scrap heap, they shouldn't be allowed to vote for a candidate that promises public subsidies to bring new inward investment to the area?

In essence, what Kleptin is saying is that poor, under-educated people tend to vote Democrat and new rules should be introduced to prevent them from doing so.

Not exactly a shining advertisement for a country that aims to spread democracy around the world, is it?
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2010 6:41:06 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/12/2010 6:37:30 AM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 11/12/2010 2:09:56 AM, innomen wrote:
At 11/11/2010 4:06:59 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
And I agree with L, since the irony is that most undergraduate students are more politically active/aware than most adults. :P

Active maybe; aware, very doubtful.

More so than most adults.

It's one of those "On balance" sorts of things.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2010 7:43:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/12/2010 2:09:56 AM, innomen wrote:
At 11/11/2010 4:06:59 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
And I agree with L, since the irony is that most undergraduate students are more politically active/aware than most adults. :P

Active maybe; aware, very doubtful.

lmao. this.

most of the people i met in college were huge ron paul supporters and at the same time wanted universal health care >.>
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
20000miles
Posts: 53
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2010 10:43:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
We (those in the US, UK and AUS) deny voting rights to those who are under the age of 18 due to inexperience and ignorance. Clearly, one doesn't attain these attributes at a physical age, so any age limit appears to be absurd. It has to based on something else.

If it's the obligation to pay taxes, then voting age should drop to legal working age, (which I might add has no age basis either). So, if you can work, you can vote.

On the other hand if this is appalling, you might base it on cognitive abilities, perhaps a test of some sort (what's the role of the parliament?...how many seats are there in parliament?...). This ensures that those ignorant of the system cannot partake.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2010 7:04:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/11/2010 3:58:10 PM, FREEDO wrote:
No taxation without representation.

People who aren't covered by my 3 points get taxed less than the value of the social services they get to take advantage of. Beggars don't get to be choosers.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.