Masquerouge
Deity
Same people who determined kids are not allowed to vote.
Should People with Profound Mental Retardation be Allowed to Vote?
- Thread starter Damnyankee
- Start date
Same people who determined kids are not allowed to vote.
That's not what I mean, that's a broad-slash across everyone. It's very easy to tell if someone is 18 or not, it's casual information to process when issuing a voting card.
You'd need a second stage, where someone brings Slow Joe to the attention of the 'system' and takes away his voting rights. Who's going to do that, and who's in charge of setting the requirements?
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Actually, it wouldnt be to deny him his voting card, it would be in order to issue him one. Slow Joe would have to have an advocate approach the court to make the arguement that he was cognizant enough to understand what he was doing and the choices he would be making. Much like the emancipaton process for a minor.
You guys have a weird system. We just get the right to vote when we're 18. No judge. No courts. Just apply to get your card, and you get one
Masquerouge
Deity
I don't see how that can be difficult. People are medically diagnosed as mentally deficient all the time.
Now I don't know how the voting card is issued in the US: is it an automatic process, and the card will be sent to you automatically without you doing anything, or do you have to apply for it (like, say, a driver's license)?
Because I'm pretty confident some people are denied a driver's license because they're ********.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
What is required to present in order to get your card? Some type of ID? Drivers license? Or do you just show up and say, 'my name is K-Pax and today I am 18 and want a card' and they give you one? What is involved in the application process?
Should everybody have to have an advocate approach the court in order to be issued a voting card? If not, how do we determine which Joe's are slow enough to have to lawyer their way to a fundamental right?
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Sounds like a prime source of income for you. Feel free to mail me my finders fee.
That's because everyone gets tested to drive.
Should everyone be tested to be allowed to vote?
Proof of citizenship and proof of residency (the citizenship proof incorporates the B-day). The card is then mailed to you.
My stance is the same one I have for prisoners - their voting power is too small to warrant having a system for taking away people's right to vote.
Masquerouge
Deity
It seems your only issue is "how are we gonna identify ******** people".
I don't see how that's an issue since it's being done already.
But TBH I'm not concerned about it anyway since people ******** enough to be barred from voting should we apply such a standard probably don't vote today anyway.
That really didn't answer my questions of how your approach can work. How do we identify that a Joe is slow enough to justify having extra burdens placed on him before he can exerise a fundamental right? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Shouldn't the right be presumed until the government makes a strong case for it being taken away?
Not very many '******** people' are ID'd unless they apply for a service that requires them to prove that they're ********. Are you suggesting that these services then mail the gov't a list of clients, to have them taken off of the voter's list?
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Generally, I would agree with you...however, in the past several years, some very important elections have been decided by less than 100 votes. Washington states last Governors election for instance....
In those elections such votes could indeed make the difference.
Marla_Singer
United in diversity
Well, I guess that the US has a specific legislation which doesn't recognize profound mental retardation as generating legal irresponsibility of one's own actions. Obviously, they even burn mental retards on the electric chair in the US. That's probably for the same reasons.
Well, in France, it's at the hospital that profound mental retardation is diagnosed and psychiatrists are those determining whether or not they could be considered as legally responsible of their own actions. If that's the case, they aren't allowed to vote, and they also don't go to jail in case they murder someone (they go in psychiatric institutions in such a case).
Obviously things are very different in the US, but anyway, considering that what is done in France cannot be done is obviously wrong.
Well, in France, it's at the hospital that profound mental retardation is diagnosed and psychiatrists are those determining whether or not they could be considered as legally responsible of their own actions. If that's the case, they aren't allowed to vote, and they also don't go to jail in case they murder someone (they go in psychiatric institutions in such a case).
Obviously things are very different in the US, but anyway, considering that what is done in France cannot be done is obviously wrong.
Marla_Singer
United in diversity
Anyway, those who believe profound mental retards should be able to vote should logically also consider that children should be able to vote. Either the government has no right to select those who're able and everyone should be able to vote, or the government can consider only legally responsible citizens are able to vote and neither kids nor profound mental retards should be able to vote. I don't see any middle ground between both solutions.
Though, it's true that I have a civil law perception of jurisdiction which is rather different from the common law system in the US.
Though, it's true that I have a civil law perception of jurisdiction which is rather different from the common law system in the US.
ValentinianIII
Warlord
Yes, I should be allowed to vote.
"Close elections" being the motivation for reducing voting rights seems to be not reasonable. Criminals and ******** people aren't responsible for close elections, a crummy choice between politicians leads to close elections
(unless we get the fabled event where there are two good politicians running ...)
Che Guava
The Juicy Revolutionary
I think that if you can legally make your own decisions (i.e. no one has power of attorney over you), then you can vote, regardless of whether you have a mental deficiency, a criminal record, or whatever else. The right to vote is simply too important to fall into any grey area.
JohnRM
Don't make me destroy you
This is essentially my thoughts on the subject.
