(November 8, 2023 at 12:09 pm)FrustratedFool Wrote:(November 8, 2023 at 11:28 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: -No.
-No. Education is not the same as intelligence.
-I was referring specifically to military conscription.
-If someone is old enough to take a full-time job, drive legally, or be married, they’re old enough to vote.
-No.
Boru
Why don't you think there's a fair correlation between IQ and GI?
Agreed. But I think both intelligence and education are required to make reaonably considered choices. Hence why I included a criteria for both. Do you not think education is a requirement for sensible voting?
OK. But with conscription I allowed for objectors. It is not uncommon for a state to require conscription under extreme circumstances.
So, in the UK that would be 18. I agree there should be consistency, but I'd raise the driving and marrying age not lower the voting age. 18 is still very young to understand politics, let alone 16. I'd consider raising it all to 21.
-Several reasons, including (but not limited to) the inherent cultural bias of IQ tests.
-No, I don’t think that. Many people leave school just as ignorant as they entered it. Suppose Joe, with little or no formal education, follows several news sources, makes it his business to learn as much as possible about the candidates and issues on the ballot, and weighs the pros and cons of his vote for each. Jim, on the other hand, graduated high school at the top of his class and holds two university degrees, but votes the straight Tory ticket because that’s what his father did. Who’s the better voter?
-Simply because conscription is common does mean it isn’t slavery (or at least indentured servitude). And there’s no evidence whatsoever that either military service or civilian volunteerism makes people more responsible voters.
-That’s only the case in half the UK - in Scotland and NI you can still get married at 16. And the voting age in Scotland is 16.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax