• 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 Someone Be Required By Law To Vote In The Presidential Election(s)?

Should It Be Required That ALL Legal U.S. Citizens Vote In Presidential Elections?

  • Yes

    Votes: 4 6.2%
  • No

    Votes: 60 92.3%
  • Only A Certain Amount Every So Many Years

    Votes: 1 1.5%

  • Total voters
    65
I'm looking at the modern era and the one directly before it. When one goes any further back than that you are looking at societies that really have little to nothing in common with the societies we see in the world today. It would seem the more "enlightened" our species has become, the fewer matriarchal societies have existed.

Actually, the fewer of any gender dominated societies exist.

Okay, and do you let the kids and the pets have a say in your society too? I hope so. I mean we wouldn't want to leave anyone out of the equation, would we? In any social situation there can only be one leader. Anything beyond that is mob rule.

Since when do kids or pets have the same reasoning and mental capabilities of full grown (competent) adults of either gender? I would gladly test every child out there, especially teens, to determine if they could truly be considered an adult, instead of going by age (I'd be willing to bet you wouldn't like this, since girls generally mature faster than boys), but it isn't practical. We instead pick an age that seems about right for a majority of young adults to be considered mature enough to be said to be adults. Men and women can easily be compared, using competent and rational tests, to have equal mental and reasoning capabilities to each other, on average, particularly once they reach their early 20s.
 
An interesting debate. Should voting in presidential elections be required by law? Of course this excludes felons and non-u.s. citizens. Legal voting age stays the same in this scenario.

My opinion: If you live in the United States, you will be required to vote in the United States. It would be a huge dis-respect to the millions of Americans that died for this country to sit at home on election day. This is a freedom many have died for so get out and participate!
What do you think would be more insulting to our founding fathers and soldiers?
- The government violating individual freedoms by forcing free men and women to take part in something that they have no desire to take part in.
or
- People exercising their freedom to abstain from the presidential election.

I understand where you're coming from, and I wish more Americans would take part in the election process, however, this is certainly not the way to do it. Real change on this matter can only come from voluntary co-operation.

@All
Just ignore Tigger guys, this isn't the first time he's single handedly troll'ed an entire thread. No one could possibly be that ridiculous.
 
A woman cannot be qualified to be involved in the political process by her gender alone. For proof of that, please show me a single significant Matriarchal society in the medieval or modern world.

P.S. - Don't waste your time, there hasn't been one. There have been occasional female leaders but nowhere has there been a significant Matriarchal society since the end of the Celts.

Google is your friend.

The Khasi,Garo, Nagovisi and Machinguenga

Great Law of Peace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many cultures, even if they are not matriarchies have included women in the political process. I really don't see how this has to do with anything. A society does not have to be matriarchal to include women in the political process, and just because something is new or untried does not make it bad. You advocate a return to tradition, but even that tradition was founded upon revolution and changing norms.
 
I believe you just contradicted yourself here. You just admitted that there has been a significant Matriarchal society, the Celts.

It doesn't matter when they existed, it just matters that one did exist. All societies, except the current ones, have fallen, no matter who was in charge of them.

I find it funny how someone who refuses to leave the 12th century sets an arbitrary limit based on dates.
 
So, Tigger.... Would you include gay men in that grouping? I will assume you are going to say NO based on your previous ramblings I have come across...

I would prefer that group not be allowed to exist in society to begin with. I would personally prefer they not be allowed a voice in society, but I would rather see them involved than most of the other groups I've discussed. Mostly because they are still a relatively small group and probably couldn't pass the competency exam to vote anyway.


Actually, the fewer of any gender dominated societies exist.
True, and that's part of the problem. We've moved away from the Patriarchal model, which worked for millenia and have embraced a genderless model which is falling down around our ears. Great move.

Since when do kids or pets have the same reasoning and mental capabilities of full grown (competent) adults of either gender? I would gladly test every child out there, especially teens, to determine if they could truly be considered an adult, instead of going by age (I'd be willing to bet you wouldn't like this, since girls generally mature faster than boys), but it isn't practical. We instead pick an age that seems about right for a majority of young adults to be considered mature enough to be said to be adults. Men and women can easily be compared, using competent and rational tests, to have equal mental and reasoning capabilities to each other, on average, particularly once they reach their early 20s.

Personally, I'm all for moving the age of majority for a lot of things to 13. Things like the age to be tried as an adult in court, to be executed, and to be forced to make full restitution for damage one does to private or public property.
 
No, voting is a privilege. It would be a violation of voting rights to force someone to vote.
 
I wouldn't favor forced voting. That's only a step away from forcing you to vote for a particular person.

I would favor a law that said after a certain number of no-shows, your name is removed from the rolls and you have to re-register. Say, 5 consecutive no shows. It covers a Presidential election, and if you can't be bothered to vote twice in a decade, it really wasn't that important to you. It would also help clear the names of those who died.

Now, I would say that even after 5 years, your RIGHT to vote is not taken away, just that you lose the privilege of just showing up and having your name on the list. You can still re-register assuming that nothing has changed regarding your right (such as a felony, etc.), but you won't be pre-registered.

Alternatively, we could just pass a law saying that you have to register every year if you want to vote, but also put in that voting the previous year automatically registers you for this year.
 
True, and that's part of the problem. We've moved away from the Patriarchal model, which worked for millenia and have embraced a genderless model which is falling down around our ears. Great move.

Personally, I'm all for moving the age of majority for a lot of things to 13. Things like the age to be tried as an adult in court, to be executed, and to be forced to make full restitution for damage one does to private or public property.

The problem is that you believe your opinion of things should be considered law, even though your opinion definitely represent a miniscule proportion of society, including the men in our society.
 
The problem is that you believe your opinion of things should be considered law, even though your opinion definitely represent a miniscule proportion of society, including the men in our society.

I have generally found in my lifetime that the fewer people believe something, the more likely it is to be correct. I find the majority to be wrong about 95% of the time. Especially when it comes to matters of values or morality.
 
I have generally found in my lifetime that the fewer people believe something, the more likely it is to be correct. I find the majority to be wrong about 95% of the time. Especially when it comes to matters of values or morality.

Morals and values are a matter of opinion, so of course the majority's values and morals would be wrong to you. Doesn't make that an absolute fact.
 
Morals and values are a matter of opinion, so of course the majority's values and morals would be wrong to you. Doesn't make that an absolute fact.

It does to me, and that's all that matters in my mind, rogue. Though I'm quite certain you were already aware of that.
 
No, voting is a privilege. It would be a violation of voting rights to force someone to vote.

Voting is a right. Driving is a privilege.
 
Voting is a right. Driving is a privilege.

Yep. Even though the voting is the much more dangerous of the two activities for most Americans. At least in a car most people don't drive straight into a concrete bridge abutment as fast as they can.
 
It does to me, and that's all that matters in my mind, rogue. Though I'm quite certain you were already aware of that.

Well lucky for the rest of us that your say counts for such a small portion of how things actually work.
 
People can vote if they want.

Government shouldn't be there to say you must vote.

What happens if I refuse?
 
Ths country was founded on the ideal of an Educated and Informed electorate. That's why the Electorate was so highly restricted at that time. As we have offered more and more people the opportunity to add their voices to the society, we continue to see society being degraded rather rapidly. That's why I see the need for a Constitutional Amendment rescinding the right of women to vote and instituting a poll exam system to ensure that only the educated and informed male members of society are allowed a say in things.

Your belief is women are incapable of examining their finances and comparing cause and effect to a candidates position?

Your belief is women are incapable of comparing their values to a candidates social platform?

Your belief is women cannot study world politics and decide what foreign policy actions support America's best interest?

Have you ever met a real live women?

Hows the view from your high horse?
 
Forcing the uneducated to vote does not help anyone. Can you force people to educate themselves then vote? Still you have the question, should you?
 
Forcing the uneducated to vote does not help anyone. Can you force people to educate themselves then vote? Still you have the question, should you?

There are "uneducated" voters of any ideology.

Whatever the case, no one should be forced to vote.
 
Aren't the majority of people who vote un-educated as it is? I'm willing to bet half of the votes cast are based on a person's "feelings" towards a candidate, not his actual beliefs or proposed policies. George W. Bush for example???
 
Aren't the majority of people who vote un-educated as it is? I'm willing to bet half of the votes cast are based on a person's "feelings" towards a candidate, not his actual beliefs or proposed policies. George W. Bush for example???

LOL!!!

Or Barak Obama, for that matter, eh?
 
Aren't the majority of people who vote un-educated as it is? I'm willing to bet half of the votes cast are based on a person's "feelings" towards a candidate, not his actual beliefs or proposed policies. George W. Bush for example???

That's pretty hackish and ignorant, imo.
 
Aren't the majority of people who vote un-educated as it is? I'm willing to bet half of the votes cast are based on a person's "feelings" towards a candidate, not his actual beliefs or proposed policies. George W. Bush for example???

So the solution is to increase this number? I don't really get it. How does more people voting lead to a "healthier" democracy?
 
Your belief is women are incapable of examining their finances and comparing cause and effect to a candidates position?

Your belief is women are incapable of comparing their values to a candidates social platform?

Your belief is women cannot study world politics and decide what foreign policy actions support America's best interest?

Have you ever met a real live women?

Hows the view from your high horse?

The view from up here is quite nice and it keeps me from getting my shoes messy in the **** and puke that is the basis of American society today.

Yes, I have met many real, live women. The answers to your first three questions are irrelevant, because even if one is to assume that a woman COULD do all of those things, by her gender she SHOULD NOT do those things. That is not a woman's place. Never has been and never will be.
 
Back
Top Bottom