I think your answer is in my quote.
The pendulum is always swinging.
Iād hope that eventually humans would develop a shared consciousness, making such things improbable. That could take millions of years though.
OK, so how do the newborns vote? And do you really think itās a good idea for them to do so?
I certainly believe that voting age should be lowered in fact. When the person is at the age able to work, they should have a say in the future they inherit. I believe it should be 13 or 14.
Upon reception of agency, shall we decide our futures.
So you no longer believe that āThe government shouldnāt be deciding which citizens can and canāt vote.ā It seems that you think the government should be determining which citizens can vote, and you seem to be basing this on the governmentās determination on when a citizen gains agency. How will the government decide this?
I probably should have elaborated more and reduced the need for other to read between the lines.
Next time Iāll be extra extra clear for you, since in a conversation of prisoners having their rights taken away, we are on the topic newborns now since we now take natural language with a hardline literal approach to language that makes the autistic in me giddy with joy.
I apologise for using natural language in context to fit in with society.
1 Like
To go further, what makes a murdererās or pedoās mind more capable of making voting decisions than a 12-year-oldās?
Couldnāt it be reasonably argued that both are developmentally flawed?
That is hilarious and sad coming from someone who just tried to score points by pointing out that humansā DNA doesnāt change after they commit a crime. Perhaps you could practice what you preach a bit, no?
Iām trying to understand your position, one that seemed incoherent and is now demonstrably so. If you donāt want to talk about voting rights in a thread about voting rights, perhaps you can post somewhere else.
Iāll post where I want to. Thank you.
I am not trying to score points. I donāt believe prisoners should be deprived of their voting rights.
Next time Iāll use the square parentheses so no confusion.
Many of those posts received hearts so other people did not seem to think it was incoherent.
But, we all understand things differently 
There. I made it easy for you.
Then one can argue that voting rights should be taken away from people with Down Syndrome.
Giving people a say helps prevent exploitation, slavery, and other god awful things.
I see your point, but almost everyone makes that kind of incoherence from time to time, and itās not a much big issue.
1 Like
Have you seen them vote?
I have because I have done work with a sheltered workshop. The vast majority of them, besides a few highly functional ones, just follow the instructions of the people helping them in the booth. Youāre arguing that is right?
Thatās not what i said.
Having the right is not the same as using the right. I donāt think it should be taken away.
We could all brush up on our logic. I really should go through it all again.
1 Like
I wonder if he feels proud of himself.
Why should they have the right if they canāt make intelligent, informed decisions and will be exploited unfairly?
Here is a piece of US history you should probably know about if you are asking that.
They did the crime, they did the time. Theyāre out they can vote. If not, your sentencing was wrong in the first place.
1 Like
Nope, right to vote mentioned multiple times in the constitution.
3 Likes
If itās not unversal. It opens the door for abuse.
Intelligence is often subjective. There are many types of intelligence.
First, that kind of decisionmaking by imperfect humans is bound to lead to mistakes.
Iām autistic. That kind of hypothetical decisionmaking is a direct threat to me.
Second, lines have to be drawn where it is already largely arbitrary.
3 Likes
Whoa, uber alles!