Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
The 26th Amendment Should Be Repealed.  
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4596 times:

Back then, the deal was that you could be drafted but not vote. These days less than 25% of those within the 18-24/26 age bracket votes. I think that is because of the 'threat' of the draft is gone, no one is into politics and we've got college. And since bringing back the draft is unpopular, repealling the amendment should make those who really want to vote bring the amendment back.

Or at least that is the idea. You know the old saying, "don't know what you got til its gone" People should fight for freedoms rather than take them for granted, by not voting.


The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4557 times:

wait... what? you're not making snese there.


"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 2, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4548 times:

What doesn't make sense?



[Edited 2004-05-03 22:17:57]


The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 3, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4538 times:

Just to make it easier for those of us who have no idea what the 26th amendment says... do you have a link to a page where I (or others) could read it, or can you give me (resp. us) a short summary of what it says?

Thanks!



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineEspion007 From Denmark, joined Dec 2003, 1691 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4521 times:

Perfect,ive got to write an essay on citizenship and im gonna start at 17:00  Smile


Snakes on a Plane!
User currently offlineRedngold From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 6907 posts, RR: 44
Reply 5, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4508 times:

Amendment XXVI

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.

Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.



Up, up and away!
User currently offlineGoose From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 1840 posts, RR: 15
Reply 6, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4492 times:

Just make the vote (and thusly, citizenship) a reward of service; that would probably encourage a good many people to accept civic duties and responsilbilities. It'd also probably have a by-product of creating a more stable political spectrum.

Either that, or make a penalty for NOT voting - loss of passport priviledges, and so on.



"Talk to me, Goose..."
User currently offlineCadmus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2004, 186 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4475 times:

Just make the vote (and thusly, citizenship) a reward of service

Nice to meet another 'Starship Troopers' fan. Smile/happy/getting dizzy

I quite thought voting was compulsory in the USA already. There's been talk about it in the UK from time to time, and several countries have been mentioned as having such a system - I think Australia was one of them.



Understanding is a three-edged sword
User currently offlineEspion007 From Denmark, joined Dec 2003, 1691 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4467 times:

I quite thought voting was compulsory in the USA already

bull!half of the US population arnt even eligable to vote anyway.And who knows what percentage of that half of the population actually does vote.



Snakes on a Plane!
User currently offlineAir2gxs From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4463 times:

My opinion is that if you are old enough to serve in the military, you are old enough to vote.

On the other point. Any requirement to perform or qualify to vote through some action may constitute a type of poll tax. And those have been illegal, and rightly so, for quite some time.

Should we make voting compulsory? I don't think so. In the words of Rush (not Limbaugh) or maybe Supertramp, "if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice." We have to accept the fact that some people do not care about politics even to the point of not participating in the process at its most basic level.

Voting is a right and a responsibility, but not an obligation. I would rather some one not vote than a have a "party line voter", "single issue voter" or an ill informed voter that votes "just to vote."


User currently offlineGoose From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 1840 posts, RR: 15
Reply 10, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4449 times:

We have to accept the fact that some people do not care about politics even to the point of not participating in the process at its most basic level.

Sure, but the problem is that those unwilling to participate in one election may jump in the next - civic duty and citizen responsibilities shouldn't be something to be picked up whenever you want, or left alone when you're not interested.

And exercising your voting franchise doesn't mean you have to cast a vote for anyone - just that you cast a vote. Casting a vote for "none of the above" or voiding your ballot - something I've done on occasion - means that voting meant enough to me to bother going to the polls, even if my vote counts for neither side.



"Talk to me, Goose..."
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8507 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4436 times:

The real issue is why can you vote and join the military, but not buy alcohol....hmmm...

I'm almost 20 and I am confident that I know enough to vote responsibly.


User currently offlineAir2gxs From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4433 times:

You're absolutely right. Everyone should exercise their right to vote at all elections that concern them, but to legislate such a thing is to move a step closer to a society in which all choices are taken away from you. By the way, I am not one of those conspiracy theory fools that thinks every move the govt makes threatens my existance. I just don't feel that someone who is disinterested in the process should be required to participate. If that person decides that 1 particular election means something to him, than let him join in. More power to him. Maybe that will be the beginning of an interested voter. But God save us from those who will vote just for the sake of voting. They will press any button to satisfy the requirement.

User currently offlineDoug_Or From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3408 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4433 times:

huh? not everone votes, so no one should be allowed to?

. I think that is because of the 'threat' of the draft is gone, no one is into politics and we've got college.

I'd bet decent money college students vote at a higher rate than non college students in the same age bracket.



When in doubt, one B pump off
User currently offlineGoose From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 1840 posts, RR: 15
Reply 14, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4424 times:

Everyone should exercise their right to vote at all elections that concern them, but to legislate such a thing is to move a step closer to a society in which all choices are taken away from you.

*shrug* That's why I'd prefer citizenship to be a reward for public service, and not attach penalties for not voting. If you don't want to serve your nation, then fine - but don't expect your opinion to make any difference, especially since you can't vote or participate in politics. Citizenship should be earned, not simply given away....

Why not? Because we're seeing a genuine failiure of democracy in countries like the United States and in Europe - low voter turnouts, radicalization of the political spectrum, and so on. So why is that? One can assume that, since everyone is simply given citizenship and their voting franchise, that it really has no value to them.



"Talk to me, Goose..."
User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4418 times:

One can't make a free vote "compulsury". One can't force someone who doesn't want to vote, to go and vote anyway.

I don't see why this Amendment should be repealed, simply because the author of this thread doesn't like the voting percentages.


User currently offlineGoose From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 1840 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4414 times:

I don't see why this Amendment should be repealed, simply because the author of this thread doesn't like the voting percentages.

Probably because democracy suffers as a result; when voting percentages go down, as they have, you see a rise in marginalized or more radicalized politics taking centre stage - in the form of protests in the streets, and in more extreme cases, riots and so on - while a very large "silent" group of folks just sits and watches. It makes the political spectrum quite unstable, and not at all representative of the population.



"Talk to me, Goose..."
User currently offlineB757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 22
Reply 17, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4405 times:

If any Amendment should be repealed, it should be the 17th Amendment (Direct Election of Senators).


"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
User currently offlineGoose From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 1840 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4404 times:

If any Amendment should be repealed, it should be the 17th Amendment (Direct Election of Senators).

Huh? Care to tell us why?



"Talk to me, Goose..."
User currently offlineB757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 22
Reply 19, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4400 times:

It would make the Senate (and thus the federal government) more accountable to the states. The people already have their representatives in the House. The Senate was originally created in order to give the state governments a say in how the federal government was run. Now all the Senate has become a place where politicians cement themselves in for decades and are only interested in their own political careers.


"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 20, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4375 times:

>> "Probably because democracy suffers as a result; when voting percentages go down, as they have, you see a rise in marginalized or more radicalized politics taking centre stage - in the form of protests in the streets, and in more extreme cases, riots and so on - while a very large "silent" group of folks just sits and watches. It makes the political spectrum quite unstable, and not at all representative of the population." <<

I agree with that. Even in the last US presidential election, the numbers were 50% ONLY because it was a head-to-head run, it would have been smaller. On average it's around 36% of those registered to vote, do. In just about every election since the 26 Amendment was initiated, the numbers of those in that age bracket have dropped, now almost 80% don't vote! None of the candidates are cattering to their needs anyway (as if!), which is one reason why nobody votes I'm sure.

I just see it as a waste, those that want to vote can wait til they get older or stand up for their beliefs and get loud like their folks did. I see all non-voters as bandwagoneers. From my perspective, every aspect of politics affects the everyday lives of all people, one has got to be out of their mind to claim that because they're not into politics, they won't vote. Pick someone!

Oddly ironic, the current line-up of candidate has not shuffle my feathers as much as I expect with others, I might not vote this time around, but then I'm not a teen-adult who'll never get drafted. Big grin



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineGoose From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 1840 posts, RR: 15
Reply 21, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4364 times:

None of the candidates are cattering to their needs anyway (as if!), which is one reason why nobody votes I'm sure.

You don't win elections telling people how you'll solve the problems or outlining solutions to serious issues that they, the electorate and the nation, face.... you win elections by telling them the other guy - the incumbant - is responsible for their lot in life and the root of all their problems.

But then, that's politics.....



"Talk to me, Goose..."
User currently offlineGoose From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 1840 posts, RR: 15
Reply 22, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4358 times:

In Canada, we're using reverse-psychology to try and encourage young folks to vote....

http://www.cbc.ca/screwthevote



"Talk to me, Goose..."
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8507 posts, RR: 12
Reply 23, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 4313 times:

The low level of voting is mostly because most people realize that there's just not that much difference between Democrats and Republicans, except for the ones on the extreme wings of either party.

User currently offlineGoose From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 1840 posts, RR: 15
Reply 24, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4299 times:

The low level of voting is mostly because most people realize that there's just not that much difference between Democrats and Republicans, except for the ones on the extreme wings of either party.

Well, they say a lot of different things... but ultimately, their actions when elected are pretty much the same.



"Talk to me, Goose..."
User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8269 posts, RR: 23
Reply 25, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4293 times:

So, by your logic, we should repeal all rights and make US citizens fight to get them back? I mean, if we don't know what we have till it's gone, why stop at just the 26th?  Yeah sure


This Website Censors Me
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Who Thinks The British Monarchy Should Be Kicked O posted Mon Mar 28 2005 23:18:54 by Burberry753
Should The Veil-wearing Teacher Be Sacked? posted Sun Oct 15 2006 18:05:17 by ThePRGuy
"She Should Be Thrown To The Sea"- Vatican Policy? posted Thu Mar 17 2005 01:20:09 by Derico
The Media Catalyses Terrorism+should Be Censored. posted Fri Mar 4 2005 15:42:45 by Sevenair
Merck Should Be Driven Into The Ground posted Fri Nov 5 2004 15:41:03 by Tbar220
Africa-How The Borders Should Be Drawn? posted Thu Sep 23 2004 02:55:39 by L.1011
Art Modell Should Be In The Hall Of Fame posted Sun Jan 4 2004 20:33:09 by Alpha 1
Who Should Be The Next James Bond? posted Sun Oct 6 2002 05:03:52 by DeltaRules
What Player Should Be On Team Canada The Isn't? posted Tue Jan 8 2002 20:36:43 by Fly_yhm
How Should The 5 Trillion Dollars Really Be Used? posted Wed Feb 28 2001 04:45:43 by We're Nuts