Thread: Should voting be limited to Americans who pay Income tax

Originally Posted by emdash

I will concede that there have been times when I've wished women couldn't vote. aside from the issue of objectivity I think they can be way too compassionate for their own good, to the point that it gets very pricey. while I know there are women like me and invayne out there who aren't afflicted with this "compassion" phenomenon, I would personally be willing to take one for the team, or rather, throw the game--but if I'm going to give up my suffrage I want to see a lot of men far stupider than me lose theirs too. I suggest an IQ requirement.

I don't think intelligent people should have to take one for the team.
It's not just in my opinion.

Compassion in women is an evolutionary trait, I wouldn't really call it compassion though. It's really more risk aversion and perpetual stability.

If your interested you should check out Maslow's hierarchy of needs, it details how generally people move up the ladder to self actualization.

Men can be just as irrational. Example I have a guy a work I'm friends with and as much as I hate discussing politics with friends he and I started talking about the election.

He said that he would rather have Hillary because Bill controlled the economy better than bush has.

I wanted to face palm so bad.

Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla

I don't think intelligent people should have to take one for the team.

then you can't restrict voting rights by gender or marital status because that would be the inevitable result.

Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla

It's not just in my opinion.

Compassion in women is an evolutionary trait, I wouldn't really call it compassion though. It's really more risk aversion and perpetual stability.

I don't know, that makes sense when considering how women vote in regards to themselves, but a lot vote policies and systems into place for the benefit of those less fortunate, and never really expect to take advantage of them personally. and you are right, it's men too.

Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla

If your interested you should check out Maslow's hierarchy of needs, it details how generally people move up the ladder to self actualization.

Men can be just as irrational. Example I have a guy a work I'm friends with and as much as I hate discussing politics with friends he and I started talking about the election.

He said that he would rather have Hillary because Bill controlled the economy better than bush has.

I wanted to face palm so bad.

perhaps an IQ requirement wouldn't nail the desired demographic. there would have to be a personality kind of test showing whether a person was more inclined towards analytical or creative thought patterns. I fear it is far too elusive a problem, and we'll just have to put up with it.

Originally Posted by emdash

then you can't restrict voting rights by gender or marital status because that would be the inevitable result.

I don't agree with restricting it just based on gender or marital status.

I was just saying that there is empirical data that shows how people view government responsibilities differently nad how in my opinion they are wrong.

Originally Posted by emdash

I don't know, that makes sense when considering how women vote in regards to themselves, but a lot vote policies and systems into place for the benefit of those less fortunate, and never really expect to take advantage of them personally. and you are right, it's men too.

What it really boils down to is that people should vote based on logical conclusions and not on emotional rhetoric.

If that was the required test to meet the standard to vote, invariably more women would most likely be left out of voting.

Originally Posted by emdash

perhaps an IQ requirement wouldn't nail the desired demographic. there would have to be a personality kind of test showing whether a person was more inclined towards analytical or creative thought patterns. I fear it is far too elusive a problem, and we'll just have to put up with it.

A personality test would be a great start.

The ancient Greeks had a good handle on the problem and understood it well.

The stoic philosophy should be used in evaluating candidates and laws but that is asking way to much of most people who don't care.

Stoicism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by emdash

so you don't care so much if voters are intelligent or informed, just if they agree with you. gotcha.

It's exactly this sort of feminine emotional lunacy which the American public needs to be protected against by requiring women to be married to vote.

A woman with reasonable financial security is generally of a sound mined.

A woman who is at financial risk or danger is generally over stressed and typically makes critical decisions on emotional impulse without thinking things through objectively.

This is why so many cultures throughout history have the men run the businesses.

It makes perfect sense and is completely consistent that women and de-maculated men would typically cry sexism here, as sich a declaration is not based on empirical fact but emotional impulse.