Posts: 993
Threads: 44
Joined: October 20, 2014
Reputation:
10
RE: U.S. Presidents & The Natural-born-citizen Clause
February 6, 2016 at 12:59 am
(This post was last modified: February 6, 2016 at 1:10 am by Sterben.)
(February 6, 2016 at 12:29 am)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote: (February 5, 2016 at 5:36 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote: I'd favor raising the voting age, the drinking age, and the enlisting age to 25.
Voting, agreed. Drinking, maybe. Enlisting? WTF. If we don't let the stupid "look at me, I'm fucking immortal" set enlist, where are we gonna get fodder for the war machine?!? (we really need a tongue-in-cheek smiley).
Seriously though. I'd be down with those. Voting age probably would be the easiest. Most kids look forward more to being able to buy their own booze than getting to help choose the next old rich guy in Washington. Getting the enlistment age raised would be fought tooth and nail by people who are looking to join up for the college money, and there are a lot of those.
I agree with Mr. Hanky, when a person is 18 they are not ready for such responsibilities. The average male that is 25 has far more sense then an 18 year old does. I would want to add that a person under 25 has no business having children but, that would mean teaching about condoms and birth control pills, in 7th grade since the average age of sexual activity is much lower then it was once was. We can't go around preparing our children with the knowledge of safety, cause you know, it would be a bad thing for people to be able enjoy them selves in their teen years, and be able to not have have major problems when they exit those years. The way it should be is for a man or a woman is education first, placement in career since the first 10 years of your field is getting a solid footing in the company or field of choice, then around 35 to 40 children optional.
“A man isn't tiny or giant enough to defeat anything” Yukio Mishima
Posts: 5436
Threads: 138
Joined: September 6, 2012
Reputation:
58
RE: U.S. Presidents & The Natural-born-citizen Clause
February 6, 2016 at 1:37 am
(February 6, 2016 at 12:09 am)Minimalist Wrote: (February 5, 2016 at 11:23 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: You want to be forced to house soldiers in your home?
It was a problem in 1770 in Boston. Now? Not so much.
Well yeah, it's not a problem because there is a law against it. The strongest law possible. I always find it odd when people cite the 3rd amendment as worthless. I mean it did it's job as protection against a military state and ensured it for hundreds of years. Maybe we should get rid of the 13th amendment because there aren't any slaves anymore.
Posts: 8290
Threads: 40
Joined: March 18, 2014
Reputation:
54
RE: U.S. Presidents & The Natural-born-citizen Clause
February 6, 2016 at 1:46 am
(February 6, 2016 at 12:59 am)Sterben Wrote: (February 6, 2016 at 12:29 am)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote: Voting, agreed. Drinking, maybe. Enlisting? WTF. If we don't let the stupid "look at me, I'm fucking immortal" set enlist, where are we gonna get fodder for the war machine?!? (we really need a tongue-in-cheek smiley).
Seriously though. I'd be down with those. Voting age probably would be the easiest. Most kids look forward more to being able to buy their own booze than getting to help choose the next old rich guy in Washington. Getting the enlistment age raised would be fought tooth and nail by people who are looking to join up for the college money, and there are a lot of those.
I agree with Mr. Hanky, when a person is 18 they are not ready for such responsibilities. The average male that is 25 has far more sense then an 18 year old does. I would want to add that a person under 25 has no business having children but, that would mean teaching about condoms and birth control pills, in 7th grade since the average age of sexual activity is much lower then it was once was. We can't go around preparing our children with the knowledge of safety, cause you know, it would be a bad thing for people to be able enjoy them selves in their teen years, and be able to not have have major problems when they exit those years. The way it should be is for a man or a woman is education first, placement in career since the first 10 years of your field is getting a solid footing in the company or field of choice, then around 35 to 40 children optional. (emphasis is mine)
Did you not get the fact that I was actually agreeing?!? I don't think those ages will be raised (except maybe for voting age), for the reasons I stated, but I agree they should be.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
Posts: 993
Threads: 44
Joined: October 20, 2014
Reputation:
10
RE: U.S. Presidents & The Natural-born-citizen Clause
February 6, 2016 at 1:50 am
(This post was last modified: February 6, 2016 at 1:53 am by Sterben.)
(February 6, 2016 at 1:46 am)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote: (February 6, 2016 at 12:59 am)Sterben Wrote: I agree with Mr. Hanky, when a person is 18 they are not ready for such responsibilities. The average male that is 25 has far more sense then an 18 year old does. I would want to add that a person under 25 has no business having children but, that would mean teaching about condoms and birth control pills, in 7th grade since the average age of sexual activity is much lower then it was once was. We can't go around preparing our children with the knowledge of safety, cause you know, it would be a bad thing for people to be able enjoy them selves in their teen years, and be able to not have have major problems when they exit those years. The way it should be is for a man or a woman is education first, placement in career since the first 10 years of your field is getting a solid footing in the company or field of choice, then around 35 to 40 children optional. (emphasis is mine)
Did you not get the fact that I was actually agreeing?!? I don't think those ages will be raised (except maybe for voting age), for the reasons I stated, but I agree they should be. I know, I was agreeing with both of you. Sorry I forgot to put you in there was well. I was trying a grievance of mine in there as well.
“A man isn't tiny or giant enough to defeat anything” Yukio Mishima
Posts: 23268
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: U.S. Presidents & The Natural-born-citizen Clause
February 6, 2016 at 2:10 am
(February 5, 2016 at 12:03 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: But it was a system made in wartime.
No, it wasn't. The Constitution was written after the end of the Revolutionary War.
Posts: 23268
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: U.S. Presidents & The Natural-born-citizen Clause
February 6, 2016 at 2:10 am
(This post was last modified: February 6, 2016 at 2:12 am by Thumpalumpacus.)
(February 5, 2016 at 12:03 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: But it was a system made in wartime.
No, it wasn't. The Constitution was written after the end of the Revolutionary War. The system which was concocted during the War, the Articles of Confederation, was quickly abandoned at war's end due to problems which became apparent in the course of governance.
Posts: 8290
Threads: 40
Joined: March 18, 2014
Reputation:
54
RE: U.S. Presidents & The Natural-born-citizen Clause
February 6, 2016 at 2:16 am
(February 6, 2016 at 1:50 am)Sterben Wrote: (February 6, 2016 at 1:46 am)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote: (emphasis is mine)
Did you not get the fact that I was actually agreeing?!? I don't think those ages will be raised (except maybe for voting age), for the reasons I stated, but I agree they should be. I know, I was agreeing with both of you. Sorry I forgot to put you in there was well. I was trying a grievance of mine in there as well.
Ahhh. All good then.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
Posts: 6946
Threads: 26
Joined: April 28, 2012
Reputation:
83
RE: U.S. Presidents & The Natural-born-citizen Clause
February 6, 2016 at 2:21 am
(February 5, 2016 at 5:36 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote: (February 4, 2016 at 11:48 pm)Cato Wrote: The name that popped into my mind while reading the OP was Kissinger.
I'm far less concerned about place of birth, and would have no problem with the recommended 20 year idea, than I am with idiots being given a vote simply because they're 18.
I'd favor raising the voting age, the drinking age, and the enlisting age to 25.
Raising the age doesn't solve the problem. Idiots don't suddenly become smart after their 25th birthday. There should be a minimum aptitude test.
Anybody that wants to bitch about disenfranchisement can summarily fuck off. Citizens have to get licenses to cut hair, drive a car, match your drapes and pillows, steal your money and convert it to stock, pick up your trash and any number of other activities, but apparently asking someone to pass a minimum aptitude test to vote suddenly becomes immoral.
Posts: 993
Threads: 44
Joined: October 20, 2014
Reputation:
10
RE: U.S. Presidents & The Natural-born-citizen Clause
February 6, 2016 at 2:36 am
I know what you mean, if only we can keep some these idiots out of voting booths. I'm quite annoyed to say this but, the brain washed people would complain they have no say cause they don't know the three branches of government, what type of government we are. and which came the first; the bill of rights of the constitution.
“A man isn't tiny or giant enough to defeat anything” Yukio Mishima
Posts: 1314
Threads: 14
Joined: December 1, 2015
Reputation:
9
RE: U.S. Presidents & The Natural-born-citizen Clause
February 6, 2016 at 3:04 am
(This post was last modified: February 6, 2016 at 3:04 am by God of Mr. Hanky.)
(February 6, 2016 at 2:21 am)Cato Wrote: (February 5, 2016 at 5:36 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote: I'd favor raising the voting age, the drinking age, and the enlisting age to 25.
Raising the age doesn't solve the problem. Idiots don't suddenly become smart after their 25th birthday. There should be a minimum aptitude test.
Anybody that wants to bitch about disenfranchisement can summarily fuck off. Citizens have to get licenses to cut hair, drive a car, match your drapes and pillows, steal your money and convert it to stock, pick up your trash and any number of other activities, but apparently asking someone to pass a minimum aptitude test to vote suddenly becomes immoral.
Of course age doesn't fix idiots, although they are still less likely to cause highway fatalities, enlist for the dumbest of reasons, or even fuck up the elections at 25 or above. But I do like the idea of aptitude tests too, if they can be developed based on fact and free of political bias. They would have to be understandable too, in a country which does not actually have an official language. Remember when there were complaints that standardized tests have been biased in favor of those who speak English, and not "Ebonics"? You know, that sort of bullshit!
Mr. Hanky loves you!
|