Teenagers to vote in California??

[The_Antibubba]

The real question is, who will end up as our next governor: Britney Spears or Ashton Kutcher?

(This is a trick question. Ashton was our last Guv. We've been "Punk'd" for years!)

 

[c_yeager]

So who SHOULD be voting: The 18-year-old mother of three on welfare or the 16-year-old who gets good grades and holds down a part-time job as well?

Well, in two years they can BOTH vote. Whats the hurry?

 

[MicroBalrog]

So who SHOULD be voting: The 18-year-old mother of three on welfare or the 16-year-old who gets good grades and holds down a part-time job as well?

Age is NOT an indication of maturity.

Neither is income.

Why not base it on some form of intelligence test? (Now, I understand it would mean no second Bush term, but...)

 

[dischord]

Why not base it on some form of intelligence test?

That would open the door to charges of racism. Did you know that many people believe that intelligence tests are unconsciously biased towards the majority race? I'm not saying they are. I'm just describing the can of worms that you'd open.

It's better that we simply just forbid dogs, children and the insane from voting.

 

[MicroBalrog]

Call me a Liberal moron, but if a country's laws are based on a written document, those people who don't know enough English to read it shouldn't vote.

I know people who are seriously having troubles with reading the newspapers every day, yet they vote. Now, when I was 17, I spoke 4 languages and had an award for the best English-written essay on the topic "What human rights mean?" in Israel. I couldn't vote, they could. I don't think that makes sense.

 

[dischord]

I know people who are seriously having troubles with reading the newspapers every day, yet they vote. Now, when I was 17, I spoke 4 languages and had an award for the best English-written essay on the topic "What human rights mean?" in Israel. I couldn't vote, they could. I don't think that makes sense.

No it doesn't. I simply was describing the can of worms you would open with intelligence tests.

Edited to add: Would I fail because I frequently spell intelligence i-n-t-e-l-l-E-g-e-n-c-e?

 

[MicroBalrog]

Which is my point.

Right now, a US 17-yo may own a Barret M82A1, but they can't vote?

Gimme a break. The Californians do make some sense this time.

 

[dischord]

The Californians do make some sense this time.

No they don't. Sorry, but dogs, children and the insane shouldn't vote, no matter what they score on an intelligence test.

Yeah, 18 is an arbitrary age, but it's also the arbitrary age that we also give a lot of other adult responsibility. Keeping it all the same makes sense (which is why I also have problems with charging children as young as 14 as adults).

Right now, a US 17-yo may own a Barret M82A1, but they can't vote? Gimme a break.

He can listen to Howard Stern too , that doesn't mean he's qualified to vote.

 

[MicroBalrog]

No they don't. Sorry, but dogs, children and the insane shouldn't vote, no matter what they score on an intelligence test.

And terminally stupid adults can?

 

[MicroBalrog]

You mean this guy is qualified to vote?

And it should be a complex test, evaluating different aspects of intelligence.

 

[dischord]

And terminally stupid adults can?

Yep. It sucks, but that's the best we can do. Tests -- any tests -- are fraught with real and perceived discrimination. At least the arbitrary age cutoff discriminates against everyone for an equal period of time and everyone has an equal chance to get past it.

By the way, your intelligence test would discriminate against dyslexic people and others who are very smart but have learning disabilities.

 

[MicroBalrog]

Dischord: GWB is dyslexic, but he did real well in his SAT (circa 1200). I was in boot camp with a guy with serious dyslexia (he couldn't spell "IDF" right) who had 140 IQ. Now IQ tests aren't perfect, but you get the drift, right?

'sides which, if the morOn in that pic woul never vote, we would all benefit.

 

[dischord]

'sides which, if the morOn in that pic woul never vote, we would all benefit.

You are basing intelligence on a spelling mistake? It is no worse than the grammar mistake in "Right now, a US 17-yo may own a Barret M82A1, but they can't vote?"

And it should be a complex test, evaluating different aspects of intelligence.

Including the ability to earn an good income?

 

[MicroBalrog]

It is no worse than the grammar mistake in "Right now, a US 17-yo may own a Barret M82A1, but they can't vote?"

You don't think that I would give it slightly more care if I had to stand with the phrase on a banner during a public demonstration?

Including the ability to earn an good income?

My income is $60 per month, your point?

 

[dischord]

My income is $60 per month, your point?

Now you are getting it!

Good income is a sign of intelligence. You have a poor income. Yet you are smart.

Therefore: Something may be an indication of good intelligence, but not having it is not necessarily an indication of poor intelligence. Thus we get the real and perceived biases in intelligence tests.

 

[MicroBalrog]

So, under your assumption, whoever fails the test, might or might not be an idiot, but whoever passes the test is surely not.

This is better than what we have, were anybody below 18 could or could not be qualified to vote, and anybody above 18 could or could not be qualified to vote.

 

[dischord]

This is better than what we have, were anybody below 18 could or could not be qualified to vote, and anybody above 18 could or could not be qualified to vote.

Superficially, yes. But it is fraught both with real biases that would lead to true discrimination and with perceived biases that would undermine the legitimacy of the voting system. And let’s not forget the possibilities for both abuse and fraud that it would open up – there’s more loss of perceived legitimacy.

It sucks, but an arbitrary age cutoff really is the best we can hope for, all things considered.

 

[Il Duce]

Kids can vote when:

1. They start paying taxes
2. The NEA is disbanded
3. Public education is eliminated
4. Pigs fly

I don't care how smart or dumb you are. You're the property of your parents until you turn 18. Simple...

We all went through it, it's not that bad.

 

[MicroBalrog]

You're the property of your parents until you turn 18. Simple...

Last time someone tried to call humans property...

 

[Kaylee]

Look, it's a question of life experience. Some things that make perfect sense when you learn to parrot them at sixteen you will see as obviously bad ideas at thirty.. because you've had the chance to see cause and effect in action.

Now I'll agree that that there's some smart kids out there. But simply being a smart kid isn't enough. And a lot of the kids that think they're smart 'cause they test well don't know nearly as much as they think they do. (I'm including myself here in that, m'kay? I blew off the scale in most every IQ/"class standing" test I took in high school. I was still naive).

Are some sixteen year olds capable of making more mature decisions than some forty year olds? I'd say yes, probably... but not nearly as many as most of the sixteen year olds would believe.

-K

 

[MicroBalrog]

Some things that make perfect sense when you learn to parrot them at sixteen you will see as obviously bad ideas at thirty.. because you've had the chance to see cause and effect in action.

Or because you've lived for 30 years among people who have seen them as obviously bad.

Remember the "Brit in a VT supermarket" story told by Jeff Cooper?

I am ready to bet that Brit wasn't 16.

 

[AZ Jeff]

MicroBalog, I think your point here is that SOME 16 year olds are better equipped to vote intelligently that SOME 30 or 40 year olds. Am I correct?

If that's the case, I say this: while SOME may be better equipped, NOT ALL, NOR EVEN THE MAJORITY, are so equipped.

We limit the age for driver's lisences, drinking of alcohol, and even VOTING, for a good reason: it takes time, in general, to reach a level of maturity where a given responsibility can be used safely and effectively.

Suitable maturity for voting is typically reached, ON AVERAGE, at 18 years of age.