Argus Posted October 31, 2006 Author Report Posted October 31, 2006 The intelligent and knowledgeable and thoughtful voters may not have the interests of "society" at heart. Why wouldn't they? Would you want me to be a member of this voting elite? Are you saying you're not allowed to vote now? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted October 31, 2006 Author Report Posted October 31, 2006 Argus that system is a failure and would only result in strife. Every person has a right to vote, and people shouldn't have to do a test in order to vote. How do you know it's a failure when it's never been implimented. Why should every person have the right to vote? Isn't it better for society if we have only intelligent, knowledgeable, thoughtful voters? Who creates and administers this test? What is the benchmark for "intelligence," "knowledge," and "thoughtfulness" to pass this test? Do people simply need to know what a party stands for? What a particular candidate stands on? I hope not, because Dalton McGuinty did a damn good job of showing why that's meaningless. How do you handle the "no vote" voters if they decide to revolt because decisions are being made for them? We can't even discriminate in hiring when it comes to people being illiterate, how do you handle them taking this test? I'm not saying you're wrong...I just need a more complete picture of this process. Obviously you would put together a test which fairly measured whether the would-be voter was a responsible citizen in keeping him or herself informed about the issues and positions of the parties involved. As for Dalton - smart people didn't vote for Dalton. As for the people who don't vote, the test would not be unduly complicated. Just as almost any idiot can pass a driving test if they put effort into it just about any idiot should be able to pass this test too. The deterrent would be in actually having to go somewhere and take the test. Huge numbers of those who don't much care about politics and rarely follow what's going on would not bother. As for illiterates - illiterates shouldn't be voting. Period. I don't regard that as discriminatory. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted October 31, 2006 Author Report Posted October 31, 2006 I agree that there should be a test. Here are the questions for such a test.1) Are you a Canadian citizen? 2) Are you currently incarcerated? 3) Are you a tax payer? Sat yes to these questions and you are entitled to vote, period. But I still think that it ought to be against the law not to vote. What is a taxpayer anyway? If you're on welfare are you a taxpayer? If you're below the income cut-off so you don't pay any tax, does that still make you a taxpayer? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Remiel Posted October 31, 2006 Report Posted October 31, 2006 I'm not really sure being more informed makes it that much easier to vote well. Just means you're more informed about how -all- of the parties having more problems than the average person thinks. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.