Voting, should it really be for everybody?

[Antibush5]

I was thinking, why should we allow everybody to vote? I was thinking, that we should only allow people over 25, with atleast a high school education in politics, should be allowed to vote. Should it really be for everybody? Why?

 

[Sunstone]

If you made Americans wait until they reached the age of reason before voting, you would need to make them wait until they were around 40 or so.

 

[Revoltingest]

Voting criteria:
- At least 18 years old
- Able to solve partial differential equations
- Constitutional literacy test
- Have run a business & met a payroll.
- Not currently living on the dole.
- Libertarian Party membership

That last one might be an unreasonable restriction.

 

[Sunstone]

I was thinking, why should we allow everybody to vote? I was thinking, that we should only allow people over 25, with atleast a high school education in politics, should be allowed to vote. Should it really be for everybody? Why?

In your opinion, what does voting accomplish? What is its purpose? I think the answer to your question largely depends on what you think the point or purpose of voting is.

For instance, if you think the key point of voting is to legitimatize the government, then you would probably want to extend the franchise to as many citizens as possible. On the other hand, if you think the key purpose of voting is to select the best possible leaders, then perhaps you will want to limit the franchise to folks who have IQs over 140 and pass a test for decent ethics. And if you think the key purpose of voting is to create a representative government -- a government that represents the interests of the people -- then you might have some other set of qualifications for your voters. So, in your opinion, what is the key purpose of voting?

 

[Reptillian]

In your opinion, what does voting accomplish? What is its purpose? I think the answer to your question largely depends on what you think the point or purpose of voting is.

For instance, if you think the key point of voting is to legitimatize the government, then you would probably want to extend the franchise to as many citizens as possible. On the other hand, if you think the key purpose of voting is to select the best possible leaders, then perhaps you will want to limit the franchise to folks who have IQs over 140 and pass a test for decent ethics. And if you think the key purpose of voting is to create a representative government -- a government that represents the interests of the people -- then you might have some other set of qualifications for your voters. So, in your opinion, what is the key purpose of voting?

Voting is all about giving people independence and the power to rely on their own reason to make informed decisions. Democracy only works if you have an educated populous composed of ethical citizens. We shouldn't prohibit certain people from voting...that would limit freedom...instead we should take care to educate our citizens and create an environment in which reason and critical thinking are promoted and encouraged. Then all people will use their freedom to act upon their ideas responsibly.

 

[Skwim]

I was thinking, why should we allow everybody to vote? I was thinking, that we should only allow people over 25, with atleast a high school education in politics, should be allowed to vote. Should it really be for everybody? Why?

That's not unlike my opposition to the get-out-and-vote campaigns we see every election. If people need to be persuaded to vote I don't want them voting.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's not unlike my opposition to the get-out-and-vote campaigns we see every election. If people need to be persuaded to vote I don't want them voting.

Same here.

 

[Sunstone]

Voting is all about giving people independence and the power to rely on their own reason to make informed decisions.

Does it work that way in practice or is that only an ideal?

 

[Antibush5]

For me, voting is to select the best possible leader.

 

[Skwim]

For me, voting is to select the best possible leader.

But people aren't the only things we are asked to vote on. However, if leaders are the only thing you vote for, so be it.

 

[Reptillian]

Does it work that way in practice or is that only an ideal?

I think the founders of the United States meant that as an ideal, but history has shown that in the absence of education, people abuse their freedom. Specifically, some people use their freedom encourage ignorance and to convince those they persuade that thinking is difficult, dangerous, and best left to others. This ultimately leads to authoritarian systems like theocracies or dictatorships. Ideally voting is about sharing power and giving each individual the freedom to act upon his ideas for the benefit of society. As I stated, I don't think the solution is to limit who can vote, but to create a culture that encourages thought. We should endeavor to provide everyone with a top notch education.

 

[Antibush5]

I think the founders of the United States meant that as an ideal, but history has shown that in the absence of education, people abuse their freedom. Specifically, some people use their freedom encourage ignorance and to convince those they persuade that thinking is difficult, dangerous, and best left to others. This ultimately leads to authoritarian systems like theocracies or dictatorships. Ideally voting is about sharing power and giving each individual the freedom to act upon his ideas for the benefit of society. As I stated, I don't think the solution is to limit who can vote, but to create a culture that encourages thought. We should endeavor to provide everyone with a top notch education.

What about those who don't want to be educated? Wiggers and such.

 

[Reptillian]

What about those who don't want to be educated? Wiggers and such.

They should still have a say and have the freedom to voice their opinion. Those with unethical or bizarre ideas will ideally be kept in check by the majority of voters who are educated. Its like if the judical branch decided to do something insane, the executive and legislative branches are still there to balance power. Or its like science where experimental repeatability keeps researchers honest...one guy with an agenda may publish some weird personal theory, but the majority of other non biased researchers will correct his mistake and bring the truth to light. Science relies on competing ideas and new points of view, I don't think society in general should be different.

 

[Revoltingest]

They should still have a say and have the freedom to voice their opinion. Those with unethical or bizarre ideas will ideally be kept in check by the majority of voters who are educated. Its like if the judical branch decided to do something insane, the executive and legislative branches are still there to balance power. Or its like science where experimental repeatability keeps researchers honest...one guy with an agenda may publish some weird personal theory, but the majority of other non biased researchers will correct his mistake and bring the truth to light. Science relies on competing ideas and new points of view, I don't think society in general should be different.

What a pollyanna attitude. Educashun don't cure stupid & crazy. Remember that most
folk in this here country believe in sky fairies, talking snakes & extended warranties.
Stupid laws, foolish agendas & lame politicians are seldom recognized as such.

 

[Reptillian]

What a pollyanna attitude. Educashun don't cure stupid & crazy. Remember that most
folk in this here country believe in sky fairies, talking snakes & extended warranties.
Stupid laws, foolish agendas & lame politicians are seldom recognized as such.

A quality education should cure stupid, and there is medication for crazy. Note that amongst intelligent educated individuals belief in fairys, talking animals, and honest salesmen drops significantly.

 

[sandandfoam]

Voting is a waste of time.
The West is run by and for corporations. Our 'democracies' are no more democratic than the DDR was. We are offered a choice between tweedle dum and tweedle dee to keep us occupied. It's a charade.

 

[Revoltingest]

A quality education should cure stupid, and there is medication for crazy. Note that amongst intelligent educated individuals belief in fairys, talking animals, and honest salesmen drops significantly.

Perhaps scales should be a requirement for voting.

 

[Reptillian]

Perhaps scales should be a requirement for voting.

But then fish could vote! Everyone knows fish have an agenda favoring global warming...the ocean rises and fish gain some prime real estate.

 

[bobhikes]

For me, voting is to select the best possible leader.

The problem arises when the best possible leader doesn't run.
Many years I wanted to vote none of the above.

I belive the system of electors and gerrymandering districts is the problem that needs to be resolved. Elected officials should not be able to set up there own territories to insure election.

How to do it I don't know.

 

[Revoltingest]

But then fish could vote! Everyone knows fish have an agenda favoring global warming...the ocean rises and fish gain some prime real estate.

Your fishphobic agenda has no place in this vaunted forum of tolerance.
Our tasty friends from sea, lake & stream deserve to be represented!