The Instigator
TheTruthInHumanForm
Pro (for)
The Contender
DebateKug
Con (against)

Not everyone should be allowed to vote

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
TheTruthInHumanForm has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/30/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 595 times Debate No: 117971
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

TheTruthInHumanForm

Pro

Looking at today's society we can see that a democratic country has several issues, One of those issues is that every citizen is allowed to vote provided that you are 18 years or older ( Some countries may differ ).

Due to this any numskull person who meets these few requirements can vote, Despite that they might not know anything about politics. When this happens people will start voting for different reasons than what that political party actually stands for.
Like skin color, Gender, If the party leader is good looking or not, You can go on and on.

This is why every democratic country should limit people's voting rights, By adding more requirements to be eligible to vote.

- A mandatory test, A basic unbiased test about politics and the current events that are happening in the country, To show that the person wanting to vote knows what is happening around them. If you should not pass this test, You won't be able to vote. The test can be taken every year and once passed should give you 10 years worth of voting.

- Immigrants ( and child immigrants ) should not be allowed to vote until they have lived and worked in the country for at least 10 years, To make sure they have acclimated well into the host country's culture and begin to understand the country's way of handling politics, Immigrants are also required to pass the aforementioned test.

- The eligible voting age should be lowered to 16 to encourage teenagers to get into politics early, They are still required to pass the aforementioned test.

- Criminals should have their voting rights revoked depending on what crime he or she has committed. For minor offences a temporary ban and for major offences a permanent ban. This to discourage people to commit crimes.
DebateKug

Con

Note: Im pretty new to this so I might make a mistake or two. . .

First of all, Realize that the right to vote isn't a privilege that has to be obtained, It should be considered a fundamental human right. It's also a fundamental right as an American. Our government is 'by the people, For the people', Not 'for the people with political knowledge'. The UN's 21st right of a human being is the right to vote, And for good purpose. Many people don't have the ability to vote, Which is clearly not right.

The second is that a couple of idiot's votes don't make an impact in the long run. For instance, The 1876 election, The closest election in US history, Still had a margin of about 200, 000 people. Even if a bunch of racist people who thinks a president won because of his hair color voted, It's not going to make a difference at all.

Also, With the right people in power, Certain populations could be very easily restricted from voting. The idea of "informed voters" can be very subjective. In the past tests like this (in the United States), Were used to disqualify poor people and black people from being able to vote.

Finally, It would just lead to more bias. The problem that you can never get past in this problem is this one: No one can be trusted to write the test. If Republicans are in power, They will write a test that favors Republican voters. This means that the Republicans have more power in the next election, So the people disenfranchised by this test can not lobby or demand a better, Less biased test (since they can not vote).
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by mosc 3 years ago
mosc
Come on Pro, Step up your game. Con has no Constitutional argument.
Posted by Idmi 3 years ago
Idmi
Anything that is morally good is intrinsically connected to happiness; the right choice to make is always the one that will bring the most happiness (utilitarianism - there are limitations but this is a good enough definition to work with).

Therefore, A morally good government aims to increase the happiness of its citizens. It is through voting that the government identifies the citizens' desires and (hopefully) therefore what makes them happier. If someone can vote, The government is more likely to cater to their desires.

However, There is a distinction between someone's desires and what makes them happy - a person can vote in such a way to harm someone else, Yet that has no effect on their happiness. They could also vote on issues that they believe will make them happy but actually will overall cause much more damage (legalising murder would make revenge much easier and I'm sure some people would love this).

Therefore, If the government is to increase the happiness of it's citizens, It must consider the fact that in order to make its citizens happier, It should NOT do exactly as the votes say: it must use the votes to identify what will make it's citizens most happy.

-One way to sort through the votes is to take away votes from people who we think use them to reduce happiness, I. E. Prisoners, People who have committed hate-crime. . . (however this can lead to governments using this to their advantage and using ambiguities in definitions etc. To get more votes)

-Another method may be to take in votes as normal, Then identify what is Actually causing unhappiness from them and make decisions based off of that (though 'misinterpretation' in votes could lead to governments making bad decisions).

-Voting may also be changed so that people don't vote on decisions, But list what is causing them the most unhappiness, And the government forms decisions based on these ('misinterpretation' could occur)
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.