On The Main Blog

Creative Minority Reader

WaPo: Lower Voting Age to 10. What!?

This could be the stupidest thing to ever appear in the Washington Post. And that's saying something. John Hawkins highlights the idiocy:

Liberals have such a childlike mentality that they can't even see the problem with letting children vote. Think I'm kidding? Then read this piece by Matt Miller in the Washington Post,

What this country needs is a movement to lower the voting age to 10. Hear me out.
Continue reading>>>

Your Ad Here


Paul H said...

Here's a somewhat similar idea I heard, which I actually kind of like:

Every living person gets one vote, regardless of age -- meaning that even babies and toddlers would be included. But the catch is that the parents are the custodians of their childrens' votes, until the children turn 18, with the father and mother each getting a "half vote" on behalf of each child.

Consider for example a family of two parents and three children under 18. The father would get 2.5 votes, one for himself, and half a vote for each child. Likewise, the mother would get 2.5 votes, one for herself and half a vote for each child.

In theory, this system would give a greater voice to the interests of children, or more specifically to the interests of families with children. And I can see some possible political advantages, when I consider that families with many children tend to be more conservative. However, there could be a lot of potential for confusion and abuse of the system, when step-parents, divorced parents, same-sex adoptive parents, sperm-donor parents, etc. come into the mix.

Popular Posts