September 30, 2007
But probably the most important point from an underdog - maybe the most important point made by any candidate - came from Dennis Kucinich, who said he not only favored lowered the drinking age to 18, but the voting age to 16. I seriously support such a lowering of the voting age - I've been saying for years that it should be lowered to 14 - an age at which, according cognitive psychologist Jean Piaget, people have completely adult reasoning processes, and have had them for at least two years.
If some Democrats trust the wisdom of kids to vote, then maybe they will lower the ages for drinking, smoking, driving, statutory rape, obtaining credit, and running for office.
Maybe my dog should vote, because she listens and follows commands better than most teenagers, plus she barks at Democrats.
Posted at 07:40 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 215 words, total size 1 kb.
Following commands is not the reason I think 14-year-olds should vote - it would more likely be that they have more wisdom than some adults.
Speaking of which - do you have any evidence for your claims? I cite Jean Piaget, the father of cognitive psychology. He was neither Democrat nor Republican.
Posted by: Paul Levinson at Sunday, September 30 2007 08:20 AM (vpfhE)
Posted by: Woody at Sunday, September 30 2007 09:10 AM (Eb/8J)
The brain does not fully mature until age 25. Myelin sheathing is still building on your neurons until then. Humans prior to that are still impulsive.
Posted by: Assistant Village Idiot at Sunday, September 30 2007 09:28 AM (YQFD4)
Posted by: Scrapiron at Sunday, September 30 2007 10:51 AM (d/RyS)
Posted by: expat at Sunday, September 30 2007 12:29 PM (VIkw3)
Of course Kucinich is for this. By and large young people would vote Democrat for a reason. They depend more fully on their "feelings" in making decisions than an adult; something many Democrats do even after reaching adulthood.
When we're young we still believe in that utopian world where everybody shares everything out of selflessness because we are taught by our parents to share and everything we share has been given to us so we have no real sense of having worked for any of it.
It's much easier to share things that don't belong to you or you didn't work for.
But then we grow up and we realize that indiscriminate charity is more destructive than anything. We are still then robbed of the opportunity to make our own decisions on who is worthy of our charity even though our powers of reasoning are more fully developed.
A sixteen year old's vote is a vote to put someone in power to do that reasoning for them.
-------------------------------
Paul Levinson:
Perhaps you missed the sarcasm in GM's analogy. But of course, for the sake of argument, you think it's better to take it seriously and counter it on a serious level than to just accept the sarcasm.
Posted by: Oyster at Monday, October 01 2007 02:31 AM (loYMN)
Posted by: Oyster at Monday, October 01 2007 06:37 AM (loYMN)
I can see it now...Hillary Clinton pandering to the youth vote by promising government pop festivals and guaranteed dates through a "Universal Match Program."
Posted by: Woody at Monday, October 01 2007 06:45 AM (Eb/8J)
Posted by: womens timberland boots at Saturday, November 05 2011 01:09 AM (zhRR6)
Powered by Minx 1.1.4-pink.








