Forums > Social Discussion > Should Kids Have a Vote
Login/Join to ParticipateBRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
Should kids get a vote?
Definitely in two minds. And if it were to be brough in, then I think there would need to be an age limit as well; a 16 year old is going to have a more informed vote than a 5 year old.
this really bothers me, but I can't quite put my finger on why. I suppose it's because the number of kids you have should have nothing to do with your needs.
I also think that there is a big political swing in this. Sorry to be stereotypical, but with the number of kids per family decreasing because more women are chosing a career over raising lots of kids, then it's a certain demographic of family who is going to have lots of kids (assuming one family member theyre staying home). More votes to religion where contraception is banned?
Nothing, absolutely nothing is going to stop the parents from forming their own political agendas here. Many people vote differently to their parents (I vote differently to my mother, and before I was old enough to vote I would have voted differently to my father, even though currently we vote the same).
Sure, some parents our there would be responsible enough to discuss the options and candidates and policies with their children, and kudos to them for it. But many will just force ideas down their kids' throats. And that is NOT democracy.
relevant side information:
when I was 16 I voted in a referendum to make Australia a republic. (As you would have noticed; we lost it) I still remember my father handing the ballot paper to me and saying "it's your future more than mine". And I believe that if more young people had voted in that referendum (Australia has an ageing population) then we'd no longer have a foreign head of state. And Dad's right; it's OUR future, not the oldies.
Discuss.
Should kids get a vote?
Definitely in two minds. And if it were to be brough in, then I think there would need to be an age limit as well; a 16 year old is going to have a more informed vote than a 5 year old.
Written by: Thornley
"A family of five or six has no more say in our democracy than a couple of two - yet their needs and potential contribution are greater.
this really bothers me, but I can't quite put my finger on why. I suppose it's because the number of kids you have should have nothing to do with your needs.
I also think that there is a big political swing in this. Sorry to be stereotypical, but with the number of kids per family decreasing because more women are chosing a career over raising lots of kids, then it's a certain demographic of family who is going to have lots of kids (assuming one family member theyre staying home). More votes to religion where contraception is banned?
Written by: Thornley
"So, we could consider parents being given the responsibility to cast additional votes on behalf of their kids until the kids turn 18 when they cast their own vote."
Nothing, absolutely nothing is going to stop the parents from forming their own political agendas here. Many people vote differently to their parents (I vote differently to my mother, and before I was old enough to vote I would have voted differently to my father, even though currently we vote the same).
Sure, some parents our there would be responsible enough to discuss the options and candidates and policies with their children, and kudos to them for it. But many will just force ideas down their kids' throats. And that is NOT democracy.
relevant side information:
when I was 16 I voted in a referendum to make Australia a republic. (As you would have noticed; we lost it) I still remember my father handing the ballot paper to me and saying "it's your future more than mine". And I believe that if more young people had voted in that referendum (Australia has an ageing population) then we'd no longer have a foreign head of state. And Dad's right; it's OUR future, not the oldies.
Discuss.
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
GOLD Member
still can't believe it's not butter
6,978 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
still can't believe it's not butter
6,978 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
lol. even if kids had teh best intentions in the world, a representative democracy should be directed by minds of more experience and less pimples.
sure there are precocious kids, however if we screened voters by IQ, there would be no votes from entire suburbs like toorak.
lol. even if kids had teh best intentions in the world, a representative democracy should be directed by minds of more experience and less pimples.
sure there are precocious kids, however if we screened voters by IQ, there would be no votes from entire suburbs like toorak.
Laugh Often, Smile Much, Post lolcats Always
PLATINUM Member
Will carpal your tunnel in a minute.
3,286 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Will carpal your tunnel in a minute.
3,286 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
What's to stop people from 'forging' infant family members to gain more voting power?
What's to stop people from 'forging' infant family members to gain more voting power?
ॐ
Owner of burningoftheclavey 
Owned by Lost83spy
BRONZE Member
nut.
756 posts
Location: Bouncing off the walls., England (UK)
nut.
756 posts
Location: Bouncing off the walls., England (UK)
Posted:
It would work fine until the Wiggles decided to stand for parliament.
It would work fine until the Wiggles decided to stand for parliament.
THE MEEK WILL INHERIT THE EARTH!
If that's okay with you?
PLATINUM Member
Will carpal your tunnel in a minute.
3,286 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Will carpal your tunnel in a minute.
3,286 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
With the Teletubbies being opposition leader.
With the Teletubbies being opposition leader.
ॐ
Owner of burningoftheclavey
Owned by Lost83spy
GOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
Interesting question Rouge. I think 18 is the right age to vote.
It bothers me that Thornley is suggesting that parents be given a vote for each child, and I was looking for a hidden agenda. It’s not like families have been under-represented by Howard, quite the contrary. Then I remembered the “Baby Bonus”
Thornley is just trying to be the first politician to harvest the votes of the baby bonus kids.
A lot of kids still don’t register to vote when they get the opportunity, so I don’t see the pressure coming from the ground up. I suppose we are going to see a lot of politicking in the months coming up to a federal election. I was so disappointed last time; so all I can say is if you have the opportunity to vote, “make your vote count!”
Cheers
Interesting question Rouge. I think 18 is the right age to vote.
It bothers me that Thornley is suggesting that parents be given a vote for each child, and I was looking for a hidden agenda. It’s not like families have been under-represented by Howard, quite the contrary. Then I remembered the “Baby Bonus”
Thornley is just trying to be the first politician to harvest the votes of the baby bonus kids. A lot of kids still don’t register to vote when they get the opportunity, so I don’t see the pressure coming from the ground up. I suppose we are going to see a lot of politicking in the months coming up to a federal election. I was so disappointed last time; so all I can say is if you have the opportunity to vote, “make your vote count!”
Cheers
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
GOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
Stop The Press:
What’s happening to the Victorian Labour Party?
Thwaites follows Bracks into retirement. Victorian Deputy Premier John Thwaites has announced his resignation from Cabinet and the Parliament, only hours after Steve Bracks quit as Premier.
Stop The Press:
What’s happening to the Victorian Labour Party?
Thwaites follows Bracks into retirement. Victorian Deputy Premier John Thwaites has announced his resignation from Cabinet and the Parliament, only hours after Steve Bracks quit as Premier.
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
BRONZE Member
HoP mage and keeper of the fireballs
1,965 posts
Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand
HoP mage and keeper of the fireballs
1,965 posts
Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand
Posted:
I just read the article and the children themselves don't get to vote however the parents vote on their behalf.
The main idea is that if a family gets a vote equal to it's size then they are beter represented in paliment.
Family Frendly is very PC nowaday init.
I just read the article and the children themselves don't get to vote however the parents vote on their behalf.
The main idea is that if a family gets a vote equal to it's size then they are beter represented in paliment.
Family Frendly is very PC nowaday init.
May my balls of fire set your balls on fire 
SILVER Member
Sweet talented nutter
2,615 posts
Location: Brisbane Oz, Australia
Sweet talented nutter
2,615 posts
Location: Brisbane Oz, Australia
Posted:
What about pets then ?.
What about pets then ?.
that shrewd and knavish sprite
Called Robin Good Fellow ; are you not he that is frighten of the maidens of the villagery - fairy
I am the merry wander of the night -puk
BRONZE Member
HoP mage and keeper of the fireballs
1,965 posts
Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand
HoP mage and keeper of the fireballs
1,965 posts
Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand
Posted:
Not human so they don't count
Not human so they don't count
May my balls of fire set your balls on fire
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
Parents voting on the child's behalf is worse in my opinion because it essentially gives some people more votes than others which kills democracy.
and bracks retired? work for 12 hours a day and you miss all the news!
Parents voting on the child's behalf is worse in my opinion because it essentially gives some people more votes than others which kills democracy.
and bracks retired? work for 12 hours a day and you miss all the news!
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
SILVER Member
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
Posted:
It's a Catholic plot I tell ya.
It's a Catholic plot I tell ya.
.....Can't juggle balls but I sure as hell can juggle details....
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
what did i do?
what did i do?
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
SILVER Member
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
Posted:
Nothing personal f.i.f: it's an historical reference.
Over the last centuries Catholics have a reputation for having many more children than the rest of the population due to the official refusal to allow contraception/abortion and often even sex education. Hence the sort of jokes made by people of my father's generation to parents of a large family: 'so, are you good Catholics or sloppy protestants'.
This was seen as an issue in countries where there was sectarian tension (in the 'old' days ( and until very recently in Ireland) it used to seem that Catholics and protestants were very different: like we regard Muslims now, perhaps), because over very few generations, the Catholic population would expand rapidly and become dominant. In places (like Australia) where 'old country' sectarianism still flourished and religion and voting patterns correlated, this was seen as a political issue.
So my comment would be immediately understandable to someone of my nationality, generation and background, and younger Aussies like Rouge if she has some understanding of the historical background of the issue. To others (like yourself perhaps, fif) it would probably seem like a non-sequitur, or dated, as many 'Western' (meaning first and second world, not in the bootscootin' sense) Catholics now ignore that bit in their personal life.
However, as an aside, religious (catholic/other christian) prohibitions on contraception and abortion still have an enormous effect on the Third world eg by refusal to fund aid operations that include it. That originated in USA and now has been taken up by our own govt, to the disgust of many workers in the field. So it's not really that dated, just operates in a different way now. Affects 'other' countries rather than our own.
Written by: faithinfire
what did i do?
Nothing personal f.i.f: it's an historical reference.
Over the last centuries Catholics have a reputation for having many more children than the rest of the population due to the official refusal to allow contraception/abortion and often even sex education. Hence the sort of jokes made by people of my father's generation to parents of a large family: 'so, are you good Catholics or sloppy protestants'.
This was seen as an issue in countries where there was sectarian tension (in the 'old' days ( and until very recently in Ireland) it used to seem that Catholics and protestants were very different: like we regard Muslims now, perhaps), because over very few generations, the Catholic population would expand rapidly and become dominant. In places (like Australia) where 'old country' sectarianism still flourished and religion and voting patterns correlated, this was seen as a political issue.
So my comment would be immediately understandable to someone of my nationality, generation and background, and younger Aussies like Rouge if she has some understanding of the historical background of the issue. To others (like yourself perhaps, fif) it would probably seem like a non-sequitur, or dated, as many 'Western' (meaning first and second world, not in the bootscootin' sense) Catholics now ignore that bit in their personal life.
However, as an aside, religious (catholic/other christian) prohibitions on contraception and abortion still have an enormous effect on the Third world eg by refusal to fund aid operations that include it. That originated in USA and now has been taken up by our own govt, to the disgust of many workers in the field. So it's not really that dated, just operates in a different way now. Affects 'other' countries rather than our own.
.....Can't juggle balls but I sure as hell can juggle details....
SILVER Member
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
Posted:
Well we have Tweedledum and Tweedledee now: getting there
Written by: triskaidekia
It would work fine until the Wiggles decided to stand for parliament.
Well we have Tweedledum and Tweedledee now: getting there
.....Can't juggle balls but I sure as hell can juggle details....
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
Tis one of the things I was thinking of when I was talking about voting stereotypes, I just didn't know how to word it without potentially offending people (i figured religion was more touchy than business women!).
Written by: newgabe
So my comment would be immediately understandable to someone of my nationality, generation and background, and younger Aussies like Rouge if she has some understanding of the historical background of the issue.
Tis one of the things I was thinking of when I was talking about voting stereotypes, I just didn't know how to word it without potentially offending people (i figured religion was more touchy than business women!).
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
SILVER Member
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
Posted:
yeah, don't want to upset religious types eh. They bite.
So the other side of it is if the educated women have less babies (which is true all over the world, irrespective of religion) it's the less educated who will be swamping us then.
Which is one possible reason why State funding for private (most of which were catholic) schools finally came into being here. Wanting to reduce the us-and-them- feeling of the place, but also to raise the educational levels of ladies of that particular faith. Discuss.
Written by: Rouge Dragon
Tis one of the things I was thinking of when I was talking about voting stereotypes, I just didn't know how to word it without potentially offending people (i figured religion was more touchy than business women!).
yeah, don't want to upset religious types eh. They bite.So the other side of it is if the educated women have less babies (which is true all over the world, irrespective of religion) it's the less educated who will be swamping us then.
Which is one possible reason why State funding for private (most of which were catholic) schools finally came into being here. Wanting to reduce the us-and-them- feeling of the place, but also to raise the educational levels of ladies of that particular faith. Discuss.
.....Can't juggle balls but I sure as hell can juggle details....
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
oi! get your own discussion thread!
actually, I figure that there state funding for private schools because thats where the politicians come from, thats where the rich daddies who support the politicians went to and now send their kids to. Alternatively there is also the answer that (I think) the politicians give which is that rich parents pay more taxes therefore the funding is proportionate to their taxes.
Oh, and cos the Catholics were ususally Irish so it was like government funded prisons
oi! get your own discussion thread!
actually, I figure that there state funding for private schools because thats where the politicians come from, thats where the rich daddies who support the politicians went to and now send their kids to. Alternatively there is also the answer that (I think) the politicians give which is that rich parents pay more taxes therefore the funding is proportionate to their taxes.
Oh, and cos the Catholics were ususally Irish so it was like government funded prisons
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
SILVER Member
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
Posted:
Ya the original Catholics in Oz were Irish, but after the war there was also a large number of Italians and other European Catholics, remember? There was also quite a distinction between the few 'rich' private schools (often boarding schools) with high quality education and loadsa money, and the widespread network of catholic day schools with relatively poor standards. I remember the debates about this addressed both directions: rich people who want to be separate to the (secular) mainstream for snobby/advancement reasons could jolly well pay for it, and catholics who wanted to be separate for religious indoctrination purposes could too. These days there are also loads of christian schools that are not catholic... more those newfangled protestant happy clappy types and assorted other independent ones as well. I wasn't living in the country when state-aid-for-private-schools kicked in. So I am not quite sure what turned it in the end. Vote catching? A sense that everyone should be educated well? Maybe someone who was here then could fill me in. I'd go read about it but I'm currently deep into 17th century English legal history and its repurcussions on current international civil rights law so I haven't got time.
Oh yeah meanwhile, should kids vote? Not till they learn to spin fire
Ya the original Catholics in Oz were Irish, but after the war there was also a large number of Italians and other European Catholics, remember? There was also quite a distinction between the few 'rich' private schools (often boarding schools) with high quality education and loadsa money, and the widespread network of catholic day schools with relatively poor standards. I remember the debates about this addressed both directions: rich people who want to be separate to the (secular) mainstream for snobby/advancement reasons could jolly well pay for it, and catholics who wanted to be separate for religious indoctrination purposes could too. These days there are also loads of christian schools that are not catholic... more those newfangled protestant happy clappy types and assorted other independent ones as well. I wasn't living in the country when state-aid-for-private-schools kicked in. So I am not quite sure what turned it in the end. Vote catching? A sense that everyone should be educated well? Maybe someone who was here then could fill me in. I'd go read about it but I'm currently deep into 17th century English legal history and its repurcussions on current international civil rights law so I haven't got time.
Oh yeah meanwhile, should kids vote? Not till they learn to spin fire
.....Can't juggle balls but I sure as hell can juggle details....
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
I know there are European Catholics too, but if you consider the age of those prestigeous Catholic schools, they're frequently over 100 years old which pre-dates that immigration wave.
I can't fill you in when they introduced the state-aid. I was too young to know what was going on.
I know there are European Catholics too, but if you consider the age of those prestigeous Catholic schools, they're frequently over 100 years old which pre-dates that immigration wave.
I can't fill you in when they introduced the state-aid. I was too young to know what was going on.
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
BRONZE Member
HoP mage and keeper of the fireballs
1,965 posts
Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand
HoP mage and keeper of the fireballs
1,965 posts
Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand
Posted:
Written by: Rouge Dragon
Oh, and cos the Catholics were ususally Irish so it was like government funded prisons
May my balls of fire set your balls on fire
SILVER Member
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
Posted:
Only some of the older private schools are Catholic. Many are CofE or other protestant. That's why I say that opposition to state funding for private schooling had 2 prongs... against funding a system likely to entrench class and privilege (of any sort) and the other particularly so that religious identifications were not emphasised en masse. There used to be loads of discussion about this though now it is almost accepted that the state should fund people who choose alternate systems. There is now just a minor murmur about very wealthy schools getting state money. Mostly from the state teacher's unions who then get seen as 'biased'.
Written by: Rouge Dragon
the age of those prestigeous Catholic schools, they're frequently over 100 years old which pre-dates that immigration wave.
Only some of the older private schools are Catholic. Many are CofE or other protestant. That's why I say that opposition to state funding for private schooling had 2 prongs... against funding a system likely to entrench class and privilege (of any sort) and the other particularly so that religious identifications were not emphasised en masse. There used to be loads of discussion about this though now it is almost accepted that the state should fund people who choose alternate systems. There is now just a minor murmur about very wealthy schools getting state money. Mostly from the state teacher's unions who then get seen as 'biased'.
.....Can't juggle balls but I sure as hell can juggle details....
SILVER Member
addict
449 posts
Location: Australia
addict
449 posts
Location: Australia
Posted:
Hmm i wonder if you'd get some really politically inclined people having millions of babies just so that they get more votes?
People did it for the baby bonus...
Written by: Rouge Dragon
Parents voting on the child's behalf is worse in my opinion because it essentially gives some people more votes than others which kills democracy.
and bracks retired? work for 12 hours a day and you miss all the news!
Hmm i wonder if you'd get some really politically inclined people having millions of babies just so that they get more votes?
People did it for the baby bonus...
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
I think that allowing people with children more than one vote is heterosexist and, furthermore, undermines the concept of "one person, one vote."
I have, however, thought that lowering the age to 16 might bring about some positive change.
I think that allowing people with children more than one vote is heterosexist and, furthermore, undermines the concept of "one person, one vote."
I have, however, thought that lowering the age to 16 might bring about some positive change.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
SILVER Member
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
Posted:
Indeed Doc, I just came on to write exactly that! (I've been thinking about this whilst vacuuming...)
Itcould be argued that it extends the concept of person... to those under 18. But then handing that vote over to the parents returns them to the status of pawns or property.
The idea that 'people with children have more stake in the future' is quite peculiar. This would somehow make them.. what.. more likely to vote for sustainable energy? Social housing? Building social capital?
OR 'give more for my investment right now cos being personally rich is the highest good'?
Either way people will just vote for their current predilection. And frequent pregnancy is not considered a sign of forethought outside of the Third World, where ya need lots of kids so some survive...
Written by: Doc Lightning
I think that allowing people with children more than one vote is heterosexist
Indeed Doc, I just came on to write exactly that! (I've been thinking about this whilst vacuuming...)
Written by: Doc Lightning
furthermore, undermines the concept of "one person, one vote."
Itcould be argued that it extends the concept of person... to those under 18. But then handing that vote over to the parents returns them to the status of pawns or property.
The idea that 'people with children have more stake in the future' is quite peculiar. This would somehow make them.. what.. more likely to vote for sustainable energy? Social housing? Building social capital?
OR 'give more for my investment right now cos being personally rich is the highest good'?
Either way people will just vote for their current predilection. And frequent pregnancy is not considered a sign of forethought outside of the Third World, where ya need lots of kids so some survive...
.....Can't juggle balls but I sure as hell can juggle details....
SILVER Member
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
what goes around comes around. unless you're into stalls.
4,030 posts
Location: Bali, Australia
Posted:
Well guess what:
[Quote]Evan Thornley: ....I was struggling just to make sense of university, but after three or four years, interestingly enough I got involved in the Catholic Students’ Group ...[/Quote]
Gabe's Aussie political nose strikes again
btw I am in no way implying that Mr Thornley is thereby a bad fellow. In fact I just read the
text of a speech
he made to the Catholic community services organisation Centacare, and it's a very interesting read. The dude's a Fabian.
Well guess what:
[Quote]Evan Thornley: ....I was struggling just to make sense of university, but after three or four years, interestingly enough I got involved in the Catholic Students’ Group ...[/Quote]
Gabe's Aussie political nose strikes again
btw I am in no way implying that Mr Thornley is thereby a bad fellow. In fact I just read the
text of a speech
he made to the Catholic community services organisation Centacare, and it's a very interesting read. The dude's a Fabian.
.....Can't juggle balls but I sure as hell can juggle details....
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Carpal \'Tunnel
5,814 posts
Location: Perth, Australia
Posted:
Wonder how it would affect a non compulosry voting country.
Wonder how it would affect a non compulosry voting country.
Is it the Truth?
Is it Fair to all concerned?
Will it build Goodwill and Better Friendships?
Will it be Beneficial to all concerned?
Im in a lonely battle with the world with a fish to match the chip on my shoulder. Gnu in Binnu in a cnu
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
Exactly. If you give parents' their kids' vote then it makes children property. If anything, it devalues them even more.
Furthermore, giving extra votes to people with children won't affect the way they vote. People tend to assume that their children will have similar values to their own. If you believe that it's arrogance to believe that humans could change the weather and thus tamper with God's creation, or if you believe that gays are hellspawn and should be put to death or if you believe that Christ/Allah/the Easter Bunny is Lord of all and that all who do not believe this should be second-class citizens then you will vote your extra votes that way.
All this does is give extra political power to people with kids, the more kids, the more power.
Written by: newgabe
Itcould be argued that it extends the concept of person... to those under 18. But then handing that vote over to the parents returns them to the status of pawns or property.
The idea that 'people with children have more stake in the future' is quite peculiar. This would somehow make them.. what.. more likely to vote for sustainable energy? Social housing? Building social capital?
OR 'give more for my investment right now cos being personally rich is the highest good'?
Either way people will just vote for their current predilection. And frequent pregnancy is not considered a sign of forethought outside of the Third World, where ya need lots of kids so some survive...
Exactly. If you give parents' their kids' vote then it makes children property. If anything, it devalues them even more.
Furthermore, giving extra votes to people with children won't affect the way they vote. People tend to assume that their children will have similar values to their own. If you believe that it's arrogance to believe that humans could change the weather and thus tamper with God's creation, or if you believe that gays are hellspawn and should be put to death or if you believe that Christ/Allah/the Easter Bunny is Lord of all and that all who do not believe this should be second-class citizens then you will vote your extra votes that way.
All this does is give extra political power to people with kids, the more kids, the more power.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
BRONZE Member
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
old hand
1,107 posts
Location: In a test pit, Mackay, Australia
Posted:
Having seen what hangs around the local shopping centre, I wouldn't trust them to dress themselves, let alone decide the future of a nation.
Frankly, kids are way too idealistic to make sensible discisions (stereotyping, no avoiding it). We'd all like to vote for the party that promises to completely cut emissions, fund every bit of education and make the world a generally happy place to be, but when you've got a mortgage, car repayments and a family to cater for, those pesky little things like interest rates and taxes come into the equation. You're not going to find many 14-year olds who really give a toss about that sort of thing as it doesn't directly affect them.
You've got to be pragmatic and make an informed choice, particularly with the spectacularly weird Australian voting system when your vote could potentially end up bringing in senators from other obnoxious parties (for overseas residents, don't ask, suffice to say after an election it's about a week before a winner is officially declared because of second and third preferences.)
I ramble. Should kids have the vote? No. Should their parents have an extra vote instead? No. Do I understand how votes are counted here? No.
Having seen what hangs around the local shopping centre, I wouldn't trust them to dress themselves, let alone decide the future of a nation.
Frankly, kids are way too idealistic to make sensible discisions (stereotyping, no avoiding it). We'd all like to vote for the party that promises to completely cut emissions, fund every bit of education and make the world a generally happy place to be, but when you've got a mortgage, car repayments and a family to cater for, those pesky little things like interest rates and taxes come into the equation. You're not going to find many 14-year olds who really give a toss about that sort of thing as it doesn't directly affect them.
You've got to be pragmatic and make an informed choice, particularly with the spectacularly weird Australian voting system when your vote could potentially end up bringing in senators from other obnoxious parties (for overseas residents, don't ask, suffice to say after an election it's about a week before a winner is officially declared because of second and third preferences.)
I ramble. Should kids have the vote? No. Should their parents have an extra vote instead? No. Do I understand how votes are counted here? No.
There is a slight possibility that I am not actually right all of the time.
member
29 posts
Location: Jersey, Channel Islands
29 posts
Location: Jersey, Channel Islands
Posted:
Interesting. Very interesting.
A couple of years ago, my dad started a big argument with me. It was because the local elections were coming up, and I wasn't going to vote.
The reason I wasn't going to vote was because I knew nothing about the candidates or what they stood for.
The reason he wanted me to vote, was so that I didn't "waste my vote". Fair point, but I'm not about to vote for someone I don't know anything about purely because I'm told to by my father. His solution? Vote for the same person as he and mum were going to vote for. I objected even more to this, but he couldn't see why.
Anyway, it was a week until elections, I educated myself about the candidates, and voted.
I voted differently to my father and mother, and wouldn't tell them until after the event who i'd voted for. it REALLY pissed them off too (well, my dad anyway).
So yeah, I'm against the "additional vote" thing for kids who aren't 18. that won't balance out.
Written by: Thornley
"So, we could consider parents being given the responsibility to cast additional votes on behalf of their kids until the kids turn 18 when they cast their own vote."
Interesting. Very interesting.
A couple of years ago, my dad started a big argument with me. It was because the local elections were coming up, and I wasn't going to vote.
The reason I wasn't going to vote was because I knew nothing about the candidates or what they stood for.
The reason he wanted me to vote, was so that I didn't "waste my vote". Fair point, but I'm not about to vote for someone I don't know anything about purely because I'm told to by my father. His solution? Vote for the same person as he and mum were going to vote for. I objected even more to this, but he couldn't see why.
Anyway, it was a week until elections, I educated myself about the candidates, and voted.
I voted differently to my father and mother, and wouldn't tell them until after the event who i'd voted for. it REALLY pissed them off too (well, my dad anyway).
So yeah, I'm against the "additional vote" thing for kids who aren't 18. that won't balance out.
Uchi
Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity
BRONZE Member
Returning to a unique state of Equilibrium
3,289 posts
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Returning to a unique state of Equilibrium
3,289 posts
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posted:
eh - we let demented people at the other end of life vote - and the Australian voting public has already elected the current government several times on the back of lies - so I don't see any problem with letting people vote...once they are able to walk on their own into the polling booth.
I agree that giving the parents the kids vote is against the values of Democracy.
more idealism would do us good - social progress was never brought about by the pragmatists or economists of the ilk that are dominating politics at this time....(until recently, when even the economists are forcasting big losses due to climate change)
eh - we let demented people at the other end of life vote - and the Australian voting public has already elected the current government several times on the back of lies - so I don't see any problem with letting people vote...once they are able to walk on their own into the polling booth.
I agree that giving the parents the kids vote is against the values of Democracy.
more idealism would do us good - social progress was never brought about by the pragmatists or economists of the ilk that are dominating politics at this time....(until recently, when even the economists are forcasting big losses due to climate change
) --
Help! My personality got stuck in this signature machine and I cant get it out!
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com