Earning the Vote

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

-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

1) I'm not sure modern IQ tests have that flaw.  I think, though I may be wrong, they are the best measures we have of GI for any culture.  Is there a better one?

2) That seems to be a problem with the nature of the education, not the concept of education itself.  IT also seems you are comparing a more educated person with a less educated one.  The answer isn't to throw education in the bin as a relevant metric, it's to make the education in question better.

3) If you have the option to opt out as an objector it isn't slavery.  As for evidence, I wouldn't even know where to begin to measure a 'good voter'. 

4) The issue is to be consistent and to have a suitable age.  Why do we limit some things by age?  Because we recognise that development takes time.  Marriage and voting at 16, but not alcohol, porn, driving, horror films, opting out of maths education, a credit card, or tattoos.  Doesn't seem very consistent.  And just because I can do X doesn't mean I can do Y.  Voting seems, to me, to require a degree of maturity that isn't likely to be found in most 16 year olds.

-The cultural bias in the tests is real. But as I said, that's not the only issue with them.

-I'm not discounting the value of formal education, I just don't think it applies to voting as much as you seem to think it does. 

-And if your objection is denied (which happens a lot), you go to prison. So, you've simply swapped one type of slavery for another. I suppose that if you also have the option to run away from massa on de plantation, it's not slavery either.

-So, you're more concerned about a voter's maturity than their actual calendar age. That seems perfectly reasonable to me. But age is a lousy metric to determine someone's level of maturity. How do you determine whether a 35 year old is more mature than a 16 year old? Just as a person level of education isn't necessarily indicative of their intelligence, age isn't necessarily indicative of maturity.

Boru