Posts by Steve Parks
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
They did ask for the voting age to be lowered to 16. Some (Hilary, I think it was) suggested 16 initially, and going lower progressively. (I think the time line suggested was entirely unrealistic, but we're all allowed to hypothesize, I guess. But I do think there will be continued downward pressure on the voting age.)
It's not all or nothing. Anyway, so you agree with those of us who think the voting age should be lowered, but just no lower than 16? Cool.
-
If you're going to mention "The Great Schlep" you have to include Sarah Silverman's promo.
I posted that already - page 7.
But I thought it might not have been prominent enough, so good to see it drawn attention to again. Silverman's show is back on again, too. It's pretty good.
-
Seriously, if you think a 12 year old has the mental capacity to vote responsibly then it follows that they also have the mental capacity to drink responsibly and make a responsible choice as to whether they have sex or not.
I look forward to your campaign to have the age of consent raised to 18, John.
-
Good point, 16 & 17 year olds wouldn't be the *only* voters.
Actually, Rich, I think it was an objection to 12-year-olds voting that got the latest exchange going. But otherwise, yeah - if "brain too young to make decision in own interests" flys as a reason for not letting someone vote per se, then why not "brain too old..." Yada yada yada...
-
Lucy wrote (with all respect due):
With all due respect: WTF, dude? It's eighteen for alcohol and voting, and has been for quite some time now.
Oops!… Good point. But importantly, we (“we” being society) didn’t automatically assume being old enough to vote and being old enough to buy booze was the same thing. And many are of the view that they shouldn’t be again. Ages for things like driving, marriage, voting, and owning firearms are not always considered as a given to be the same.
If someone isn't mature enough to sit on a jury, then they're not mature enough to vote.
I know people over 18 who aren’t mature enough to sit on a jury.
Age issues are always tricky…
My point exactly.
If they're not old enough to run their own lives, they're sure as hell not old enough to decide who runs the country.
Again, so really old people should have their voting rights taken away??
-
Again, 15 year olds also have interests, and also need representation. Where do you draw the line?
As low as I can get away with. That relentless downward pressure, you see…
Don’t dodge, I/S. I’m not asking what you think you can get away with; I’m asking where do you draw the line? Personally, I’d be happy for dropping the voting age to 14, at least.
John wrote:
My 14 year old niece just wants the latest cell-phone ... I'm not sure if she's ready to select the next government.
Is anyone suggesting a voting system that allows only your niece to select the next government? I have a 40-year-old uncle who’s a complete fucktard. He can vote. I have a niece with reasonably intelligent opinions about the world. She can’t.
Russell wrote;
I teach teenagers and many of them simply do not have a critical thinking component operating in their brain.
Confer my previous anecdote. Also, when people get older they get more senile. (Seriously, aren’t there other posters here who know some old people who just don’t have a clue anymore?) Should we take away the right to vote when we consider Gran has got just too dottery?
While I’m on the old people voting theme: I love Sarah Silverman's plea to get old people to vote for Obama.
-
Mic weevil wrote:
so your hormones play a role in your voting habits?
Actually, yes. But so do a lot of other factors. So you're right, it ain’t a strong argument in the “who should vote” debate.
Lucy:
Do remember: jurors are drawn from the electoral rolls of the area surrounding the court requiring a jury. That's a *big* can of worms right there.
Then close it by changing the law, if that's a valid concern. We don’t allow people to buy alcohol at the same age as they can vote. Separate issue.
-
Steve: I agree entirely
And it would be interesting to know how today's children feel about John Key saddling them with debt so he can give a great stonking tax cut to his rich mates.
Actually, I was being a bit facetious. But now you mention it, I would be in favour of lowering the voting age. You say on your blog:
"16 year olds have interests, and those interests should be counted.”
Again, 15 year olds also have interests, and also need representation. Where do you draw the line?
-
But seriously: stupid people have interests to, and they are just as deserving of representation.
People under 18 years of age have interests too, and are deseving of representation.
-
__A news article based on the reaction to National's policy of the sort of people canvassed in that story is... well, it's news .__
For a less than glorious moment in media history, Britney Spears' twat -- and the utter train wreck it was attached to was the biggest quote unquote "news" story on Earth.
Are you comparing the reaction of some relevant individuals to National’s policy to the “news” story about Britney's twat? Or are you meaning the death penalty story?
Or, are you comparing National’s policy with Britney’s twat?