Do you think the voting age should be lowered?
- Thread starter JonB2004
- Start date
Jay, I think perhaps Finder was expressing his frustration at the fact that many voters in Canada during the Thirty-ninth General Election had tended to vote for the Conservative Party of Canada (hence their current status as the Government of Canada) on more of a basis of "we despise the Liberal Party of Canada" than anything relating to policy.
However, I suppose the same could be said of a certain number of Liberal voters.
However, I suppose the same could be said of a certain number of Liberal voters.
The age should not be lowered for a number of reasons, but here are two.
1. Typically, most teachers in high schools are "leftists", and despise anything on the right. This comes through in their teachings. In my kids schools, the teachers consistently blasted the Tories, until I complained to the school system. The teachers are free to have their own opinions, but they are not free to bring their biases to the school system. The same holds true for any right leaning teacher, but man, these are hard to find.
2. Most students, high school and post secondary, are by nature left leaning, thinking they can change the world, etc. While this attitude is admirable and is to be encouraged, once reality hits, this attitude changes as the students become taxpayers and become aware of how their hard earned tax money is being spent. In addition, the maturity level of most high school students is not very high, and again, this is okay. Most students main purpose in life is to get decent grades and to find a date for Friday or Saturday night. Nothing wrong with that at all, and I firmly think that kids should be allowed to be kids. But kids are just that: kids. They have not developed life skills yet, and until they can pay the mortgage their parents pay for, until they have their own vehicle they have paid for, and until they pay taxes, utilities, etc., they have no idea of what the cost of living actually is. You will find that many students are NDP supporters for one simple reason: The NDP supports totally free post secondary tuition. Great idea, but somebody has to pay for it, and it sure as hell ain't the students.
Just my thoughts on this issue.
1. Typically, most teachers in high schools are "leftists", and despise anything on the right. This comes through in their teachings. In my kids schools, the teachers consistently blasted the Tories, until I complained to the school system. The teachers are free to have their own opinions, but they are not free to bring their biases to the school system. The same holds true for any right leaning teacher, but man, these are hard to find.
2. Most students, high school and post secondary, are by nature left leaning, thinking they can change the world, etc. While this attitude is admirable and is to be encouraged, once reality hits, this attitude changes as the students become taxpayers and become aware of how their hard earned tax money is being spent. In addition, the maturity level of most high school students is not very high, and again, this is okay. Most students main purpose in life is to get decent grades and to find a date for Friday or Saturday night. Nothing wrong with that at all, and I firmly think that kids should be allowed to be kids. But kids are just that: kids. They have not developed life skills yet, and until they can pay the mortgage their parents pay for, until they have their own vehicle they have paid for, and until they pay taxes, utilities, etc., they have no idea of what the cost of living actually is. You will find that many students are NDP supporters for one simple reason: The NDP supports totally free post secondary tuition. Great idea, but somebody has to pay for it, and it sure as hell ain't the students.
Just my thoughts on this issue.
I don't think that the arguments pertaining to the validity of a youth's knowledge are particularly valid, given some of the adults that decide to throw their democratic weight around with their vote irresponsibly. Take my father, for example; in the last election, he voted Conservative. He didn't know the name of the candidate until he saw the ballot, and I doubt he even knows our Member of Parliament's name. He voted against the Liberal Party, because he was uninformed of their proposed gun ban, and thought that the ban would take his hunting rifles. He had no idea what he was doing.
My son goes to university, and even here in Alberta hes says the profs are for the most part left leaning. The Iraq war is apparently constantly brought up with obvious suggestions about America or conservatives. I have also heard of rampant anti Israel/anti Semitism in many universities across Canada.
I don't think age (within reason) is that critical. I've had conversations with 16 year olds that know enough to have educated conversation, and I have met 60 year olds that don't know shit. Having said that, I think a line has to be drawn somewhere, for the time being, 18 is fine in my opinion.
Re: RE: Do you think the voting age should be lowered?
It is of course very easy to find specific instances of things that do not fit generalizations, but "in general" younger voters are not very sophisticated, and "in general" older voters are more sophisticated.
And what is wrong with voting against a party? It appears to me that your father may have been like many of us, totally disgusted with the Liberals, and also recognised that the conservatives were the most likely to form the new government if the Libs were defeated. Pretty smart for someone who "had no idea of what he was doing". And for the record, I agree with him about the gun ban. It was a confiscation tool and had nothing to do with crime control. For further proof, see the current gun control legislation.
FiveParadox said:
It is of course very easy to find specific instances of things that do not fit generalizations, but "in general" younger voters are not very sophisticated, and "in general" older voters are more sophisticated.
And what is wrong with voting against a party? It appears to me that your father may have been like many of us, totally disgusted with the Liberals, and also recognised that the conservatives were the most likely to form the new government if the Libs were defeated. Pretty smart for someone who "had no idea of what he was doing". And for the record, I agree with him about the gun ban. It was a confiscation tool and had nothing to do with crime control. For further proof, see the current gun control legislation.
It's not the fact that he voted against the Liberal Party that pisses me off, it's the fact that he attempted to chastise me for voting Liberal with entirely false information. I actually got in trouble for voting against the way he wanted me to vote; I was shouted at and told that I should be ashamed of myself for voting Liberal, because apparently in doing so I was destroying the moral fabric of Canada. Apparently we needed a righteous, good family man like Stephen Harper. I was not a happy camper during that discussion.
What of the voters who think that the Prime Minister is the head of state? What of the voters who think that the Queen stopped being head of state in 1867? What about the voters who can't name their Member of Parliament, nor the candidate they vote for? What about the voters who choose to vote whatever way their friends are, or their family are, "just because"?
Youth voters are the least of our problems.
Youth voters are the least of our problems.
I think not said:Don't worry Five, it gets better when you hit 60.
It gets better after you actually work a job.....and actually sit down and do your taxes.
Re: RE: Do you think the voting age should be lowered?
Again, it sounds like your dad knew what he was doing. :lol:
Listen, there were so many people in the 2004 election that voted against the Conservatives using "entirely false information" that was spewed by Martin and his cabal, especially during the last days of the election, that it became a flashpoint of frustration for us conservative voters. The lies put out by Martin and the Liberals were so patently obvious, but what was so frustrating was the people (like you, perhaps?) bought into them hook line and sinker. I suspect that your dad may have remembered THAT bit of information when he and you were having discussions. And what is wrong with the description of Harper? How is that a bad thing, and when did these qualities become a bad thing in Canada?
FiveParadox said:
Again, it sounds like your dad knew what he was doing. :lol:
Listen, there were so many people in the 2004 election that voted against the Conservatives using "entirely false information" that was spewed by Martin and his cabal, especially during the last days of the election, that it became a flashpoint of frustration for us conservative voters. The lies put out by Martin and the Liberals were so patently obvious, but what was so frustrating was the people (like you, perhaps?) bought into them hook line and sinker. I suspect that your dad may have remembered THAT bit of information when he and you were having discussions. And what is wrong with the description of Harper? How is that a bad thing, and when did these qualities become a bad thing in Canada?
Re: RE: Do you think the voting age should be lowered?
And you had no qualms about paying some of the highest tax rates among the so-called democracies of the world? If not, then I suspect you are truly lost. Pity! 8)
FiveParadox said:
And you had no qualms about paying some of the highest tax rates among the so-called democracies of the world? If not, then I suspect you are truly lost. Pity! 8)
They're not a bad thing, but I don't buy that Harper is those things. I don't want a prime minister who thinks that I am morally incapable of a loving marriage. I don't want a prime minister who thinks that the Supreme Court of Canada poses an "obstacle" to the work of the Government. I have read Mr. Harper's past speeches, and they quite frankly disgust me.
Re: RE: Do you think the voting age should be lowered?
Each to his own. Frankly, the 12 years of Liberal government disgusted me, and the year of NDP bootlicking disgusted me even more.
Speaking of past speeches,though, I do recall past speeches by Martin saying we should be in Iraq, saying that he opposed gay marriage, among other things. Given the reason you are disgusted by Harpers speeches, may I also assume you are equally as disgusted by Martins speeches? Martin also said that we should be in the missle defence program as well.
BTW, all three of those speeches by Martin, well hell, I supported them, and was actually thinking of voting for him, BASED ON THOSE PAST SPEECHES. I assume you would not have voted for Martin, again, BASED ON THOSE PAST SPEECHES.
Funny how things work out, no?!
FiveParadox said:
Each to his own. Frankly, the 12 years of Liberal government disgusted me, and the year of NDP bootlicking disgusted me even more.
Speaking of past speeches,though, I do recall past speeches by Martin saying we should be in Iraq, saying that he opposed gay marriage, among other things. Given the reason you are disgusted by Harpers speeches, may I also assume you are equally as disgusted by Martins speeches? Martin also said that we should be in the missle defence program as well.
BTW, all three of those speeches by Martin, well hell, I supported them, and was actually thinking of voting for him, BASED ON THOSE PAST SPEECHES. I assume you would not have voted for Martin, again, BASED ON THOSE PAST SPEECHES.
Funny how things work out, no?!
Yes, bluealberta, hilarious.
However, Mr. Martin changed his stance on the same-sex marriage issue on a principled basis — he explained with reason why he had changed his mind, and why the issue had become important to him, and I respect that. However, I don't respect a prime minister who thinks that same-sex marriage is immoral, and should be unlawful, because the Bible says so.
However, Mr. Martin changed his stance on the same-sex marriage issue on a principled basis — he explained with reason why he had changed his mind, and why the issue had become important to him, and I respect that. However, I don't respect a prime minister who thinks that same-sex marriage is immoral, and should be unlawful, because the Bible says so.
Re: RE: Do you think the voting age should be lowered?
I assume you have not heard Harpers speeches about why he has changed his thoughts from the PAST SPEECHES. To wit, Harper has said that he will not vote against SSM. His reasons for this are his own, as he will allow a free vote when the time comes. The important thing, from your point of view, is that he has changed his opinion, which should make you more of a Harper supporter than you appear to be.
I have not read or read a speech from Harper saying that SSM should be unlawful, but I have also not heard or read every speech from Harper going back to the eighties. Perhaps he did, perhaps he did not, but where is at now, in the present, is what should concern us. Just as you give credit to Martin for changing his opinion, you should also give Harper the same consideration. Fair is fair, after all.
However at the end of the day, flip-flop Martin is retired, and steady Stephen is the leader of our country. The sun still comes up, there are no gay concentration camps, no one has been arrested for being gay, and wonder of wonders, we actually now seem to be getting along with our most important trading and economic partner in the world. All in all, not a bad two and a half months, I would say. And we actually took the lead on the Hamas thing.
But, back to the topic, my reasons for not lowering the vote remain, despite your obvious disagreements with your dad. Seems to me, though, that he has made my point about older voters being more sophisticated voters than younger voters. Older voters tend to vote for what they think is better for the country, while younger voters tend to vote for which party promisses them the most freebies. Trouble is, nothing is free.
FiveParadox said:
I assume you have not heard Harpers speeches about why he has changed his thoughts from the PAST SPEECHES. To wit, Harper has said that he will not vote against SSM. His reasons for this are his own, as he will allow a free vote when the time comes. The important thing, from your point of view, is that he has changed his opinion, which should make you more of a Harper supporter than you appear to be.
I have not read or read a speech from Harper saying that SSM should be unlawful, but I have also not heard or read every speech from Harper going back to the eighties. Perhaps he did, perhaps he did not, but where is at now, in the present, is what should concern us. Just as you give credit to Martin for changing his opinion, you should also give Harper the same consideration. Fair is fair, after all.
However at the end of the day, flip-flop Martin is retired, and steady Stephen is the leader of our country. The sun still comes up, there are no gay concentration camps, no one has been arrested for being gay, and wonder of wonders, we actually now seem to be getting along with our most important trading and economic partner in the world. All in all, not a bad two and a half months, I would say. And we actually took the lead on the Hamas thing.
But, back to the topic, my reasons for not lowering the vote remain, despite your obvious disagreements with your dad. Seems to me, though, that he has made my point about older voters being more sophisticated voters than younger voters. Older voters tend to vote for what they think is better for the country, while younger voters tend to vote for which party promisses them the most freebies. Trouble is, nothing is free.
bluealberta, I hardly see the right to marry as being one of those "freebies." I voted for the party that, in my opinion, had the best vision for Canada, and had done a good job governing thus far. I voted for the party that had not abused obscure measures in the House of Commons to obstruct the work of Parliament; I weighed many issues in deciding how I would vote, as opposed to these "sophisticated" voters you speak of, who (such as my father) voted one way or the other because he didn't want to lose his hunting rifle (which he wouldn't have, anyway).
Re: RE: Do you think the voting age should be lowered?
Well, FIVE, I don't reccall saying that SSM was a freebie. With respect, though, I would totally dispute your reasons for voting Liberal, but it would take far too long. Suffice it to say, when the government of the day wants to confiscate private property for no reason, then I have concern. When the leaders of the government of the day purposefully lie and use total falsehoods to comment on other leaders and their policies, then I have concern. When the leader of the government and his minions tell me that, as an Albertan, I am "on the dark side" (Chretien) or that it was a good thing that Atlantic Canada voted Liberal to offset the "redneck mentality of Alberta" (Brison), then I have concerns. When the leader of the country takes billions of dollars from my province and then insults my province, I have concerns. When the leader of the government cancels policies from the previous government that end up costing us billions of dollars (Chretien), then I have concerns.
And to assist your dad, Allan Rock was widely quoted as saying that it was his goal to ensure that only soldiers and policemen had guns in Canada. That, dear Five, sounds very much like the first step towards the beginning of confiscation. Like it or not, that is the consensus of opinion regarding the gun registry, simply because it was unworkable as a crime prevention tool.
Edited to add: How on earth could you vote for a party that was proven to be a money laundering, corrupt party using mine and your tax money to support their election campaigns? That alone should have disqualified the LIberals from getting any votes from voters with any kind of sophistication.
FiveParadox said:
Well, FIVE, I don't reccall saying that SSM was a freebie. With respect, though, I would totally dispute your reasons for voting Liberal, but it would take far too long. Suffice it to say, when the government of the day wants to confiscate private property for no reason, then I have concern. When the leaders of the government of the day purposefully lie and use total falsehoods to comment on other leaders and their policies, then I have concern. When the leader of the government and his minions tell me that, as an Albertan, I am "on the dark side" (Chretien) or that it was a good thing that Atlantic Canada voted Liberal to offset the "redneck mentality of Alberta" (Brison), then I have concerns. When the leader of the country takes billions of dollars from my province and then insults my province, I have concerns. When the leader of the government cancels policies from the previous government that end up costing us billions of dollars (Chretien), then I have concerns.
And to assist your dad, Allan Rock was widely quoted as saying that it was his goal to ensure that only soldiers and policemen had guns in Canada. That, dear Five, sounds very much like the first step towards the beginning of confiscation. Like it or not, that is the consensus of opinion regarding the gun registry, simply because it was unworkable as a crime prevention tool.
Edited to add: How on earth could you vote for a party that was proven to be a money laundering, corrupt party using mine and your tax money to support their election campaigns? That alone should have disqualified the LIberals from getting any votes from voters with any kind of sophistication.