The Instigator
Pro (for)
1 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
6 Points

Should the voting age be lowered

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/10/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 713 times Debate No: 110513
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




The voting age should be lowered for many reasons:

1) People think that kids would make horrible choices with the power to vote, but adults make horrible choices too. like for instance look at who is in office right now. Us teenagers did not.
2) The government can control our choices, so we should have a say in the government.
3) We are at least somewhat mature (i would say mature but some are not and are probably going to stay that way through adulthood anyway)


1) Just because teenagers did not support the historic and monunmental election of God Emperor Donald J. Trump, that does not mean they do not make terrible choices. Moreover, by so many metics, teenagers make poorer decisions than adults. Teenage brains are still developing and, as a consequence, teenagers are more likely to do the following:
  • seek excitement and engage in risk-taking behaviour
  • make choices on impulse
  • focus on short-term gains
  • fail to anticipate consequences of their choices [1]
Just last week they were eating tide pods for the love of Thatcher! We should demand more of our voters.

2) Adolescents have far less at stake in the political system than adults. If the economy were to tank because of public mismanagement, it would not impact a teenage nearly as much as it would an adult who works fulltime to survive, owns a home, and has capital investments. Moreover, they pay few taxes and cannot be drafted.

3) See point 1.


Debate Round No. 1


1) I`m not saying we lower the age to 8, I`m saying we lower the age to like 16 or something, and the teenage brain does not get fully developed until about 25 anyway. And in the article you submitted said "If they feel pressured, stressed, or are seeking attention from their peers" and voting is none of those things
2) more adults (according to NBC) have died than kids so your argument is invalid

3) See example one


1) The specific section of the source I quotes does not say what you have said it does. The article points to research which demonstrates that the frontal lobe of a teenager aged 12 to 17 (not 8) is less developed than their adult counterparts. Researchers attribute the poor decision making and short termed thinking patterns of teenagers to this biological difference. It has nothing to do with peer pressure.

2) First, the tide pods bit was a pithy, toss away line, not the crux of my rebuttal. Second, the article you provided to substantiate your claim discusses the risks posed to those who suffer from psychological impairments.

At this point, I would point out that I am the only party here who has put forth an argument that is not highly speculative and that is actually substantiated by credible evidence. Thank you.

As an addendum, here is some further reading on the Tide Pod Challenge phenomenon:

Debate Round No. 2


1) Teenagers are responsible enough to drive, have jobs, and therefore ALSO HAVE TO PAY TAXES, you would think if they had to pay taxes they should at least have some say in the government

2) Still more adults have done it so... Your argument is still invalid (it is just more teens youtubed it)(no I`m not sure if that is a word but it is now)

And for the record i have been submitting VERY good evidence. (that is an opinion but still)

Since this is the last round i would also like to say Thank you David for losing to me this was a very nice argument


1) I never argued that teenagers do not pay taxes at all. I argued they pay fewer taxes and they have less at stake in the political decisions made by government. Moreover, you pointed out that teenagers are allowed to drive, as a means of supporting your side of this debate. I believe that this was a rather poor example to choose, as young drivers are more likely to be involved in car accidents than their adult cohorts. Indeed, according to the Center for Disease Control, "Teens are more likely than older drivers to speed and allow shorter headways (the distance from the front of one vehicle to the front of the next)." [1] Moreover, they're less likely to recognize dangerous driving habits and situations. [1] Again, they clearly still need to undergo some mental maturation.

2) Once again, the tide pod business was not my argument. It was a J-O-K-E.

[1]; Under "Risk factors" tab
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by KamikazeKennedyJr 3 years ago
Well most teenagers I know dont read books and think Capitalist America should be turned into Communist America with no actual study on how those two economies differ and how they would affect the society as a whole so yeah no, its fine as it is. Most kids these days are not naturally inclined towards politics and the majority of them would vote just like they vote in their household. A lot of teenagers got into politics in the last 2 years but it's literally because they think Emperor Palpatine just became President, the other half got into politics to avoid Cruella de Vil from becoming POTUS. Itll blow over and in a few years teenagers will go back to smoking weed and worrying about finals and SAT scores and not giving a *expletive* about politics
Posted by The_Icy_Alaskan_Cop 3 years ago
Although I agree that the voting age should remain 18, the contender (as well as the instigator) were making very poor arguments. My teenage brother studies hard and never eats tide pods, so please stop bringing up the tide pods. Just because that is what you see on social media doesn't mean that half of it isn't fake. I'm not saying that there are not exceptions to the adolescent stereotype and that there are not some smart kids, but the age should not be lowered.

The instigator's argument wasn't great but he did his best considering the ludicrous argument he had made, the contender has the potential to make a decent argument but decided to focus on stereotypes rather than statistics, quotes, and information.

In the meantime, none of these two clowns will be getting vote from me.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by avan6 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:16 
Reasons for voting decision: I believe the con is right.

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