• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should willfully ignorant people be allowed to vote

This is another one of those ideas that sounds good, but is boneheaded and absurd upon closer inspection. Who determines what is ignorant, let alone willfully ignorant? You? Me? Some politician that you already don't trust? What's reasonable? What would the test be? How government works? Partisan ideals? IQ test?

People who support this kind of idea essentially are foolish enough to think they would somehow be a primary beneficiary.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Examples of universal truth: politicans lie, and night follows day.
Click to expand...

If only there was a way to see through their true intentions. I have been thinking about this actually. Even if a politician truly believes in their future projects, and we can objectively see in their beliefs (say with a truth device), nothing to guarantee that those projects may actualize! What is to keep the politician from changing his mind?
 
I would submit that people who endorse this idea are the ones who are willfully ignorant. The others we think we're talking about are simply just ignorant.
 
Need a national voting test. Start administering in high school. Take it until you pass or grow weary. Available at sites
other then schools. Computer shuffle answers, basic like the three branches of government and their relationships.
Who would object?
 
I don't think anyone should be allowed to cast a vote who has no clue on the issues........
 
No, of course not.
 
Navy Pride said:
I don't think anyone should be allowed to cast a vote who has no clue on the issues........
Click to expand...

And as a proud member of the party of small government, I'm sure you trust the government to decide on that particular standard, right?
 
radcen said:
I nominate this for Ironic Post of the Day.
Click to expand...

I have seen the man on the street interviews where the person was asked to identify the candidate and the person could not do it. That kind of a voter is a danger to this country... I have also seen cases where the person interviewed had no clue where the candidate stood on the issues..........It is obvious those things mean nothing to you.
 
Deuce said:
And as a proud member of the party of small government, I'm sure you trust the government to decide on that particular standard, right?
Click to expand...

The person does not have to be a rocket scientist but for Gods sake know who the candidates are and where they stand on the issues........
 
Navy Pride said:
I have seen the man on the street interviews where the person was asked to identify the candidate and the person could not do it. That kind of a voter is a danger to this country... I have also seen cases where the person interviewed had no clue where the candidate stood on the issues..........It is obvious those things mean nothing to you.
Click to expand...
Whooooooosh!!!!!!!!!!!!... right over the head. :lamo
 
Everyone who votes on the abortion issue, has already been born.
 
who said the government should be the ones to decide that? you, apparently.
 
hey you know what? unborn babies have no clue on the issues, maybe nobody should speak for them LOL jk
 
AmericanWoman76 said:
Should willfully ignorant people be allowed to vote? Or should voter be required to document that they have done a reasonable effort at researching candidates and issues to obtain a voter I.D.? Should equal use of both Democrat and Republican news sources be part of the definition of reasonable effort? Should people who are unemployed have to spend more time on research than the employed, to qualify as a reasonable effort? with each person's search documentation attached to their identity and subject to a challenge, and the way they voted remaining anonymous? Should we make it easier to obtain voter I.D. than it presently is, by eliminating proof of current residence as a requirement, which poses an unnecessary hardship on the poor and minorities?
Click to expand...

No, they shouldn't...but I didn't like Romney either.
 
AmericanWoman76 said:
hey you know what? unborn babies have no clue on the issues, maybe nobody should speak for them LOL jk
Click to expand...

I hope before I die I can see abortion banned with the exception of for the health of the mother.
 
Teachers are best qualified to define a measurement of whether a person is participating in their own education. It's within their professional expertise. It should be done by teachers of private schools only, so that there's no conflict of interest.
 
Navy Pride said:
I hope before I die I can see abortion banned with the exception of for the health of the mother.
Click to expand...

Its not going to happen. Your one shot went out the window when Obama was re-elected. I think God daily that Obama was re-elected. If Romney had won, he would have appointed right-wing activist judges that would have altered our Constitution for the next generation. Obama's re-election protects the balance on the court for the next generation...and if he gets more than two more appointments, he could protect it for generations to come.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom