Voting Age

@ dougie poynter;

I think you're in the same boat as me. Neither side is all that appealing. Also, I wouldn't be too certain about the whole Braveheart thing for young voters. I do think that the sectarian laws will lose them a lot of votes. I mean, for goodness sake, that is the soul reason my mother is voting 'no' - because she feels oppressed over laws preventing religious hatred. I'm kinda predicting that there will be a noticeable split between Protestants and Catholics when it comes to the crunch. I know a few people (most of them older than me) who simply wish to retain a union because RAH MONARCHY RAH UNION RAH GREAT BRITAIN.

The whole thing is a brass neck.

I have honestly not a clue whether Scotland would be financially better off together or apart with the rest. I've heard that many statistics and there is so much bias it is practically impossible to tell truth from shite.

I do know that the Dally Mail et al was on a "Get rid of the sponging Scots" kick but I haven't any idea if Muslims, Pippa Middleton's arse and Royal Babies have distracted them. That was the only real 'Yes' vibe from anyone down south. Course, it IS the Daily Mail and as much a reflection of public opinion as a wooden spoon can reflect your face.

I have no idea what to vote for but I don't want to NOT vote. It's...it's a bit terrifying.

Since 16 is considered a child (in America and other countries), I don't think that they should be allowed to vote. Some 16 year olds might be interested and very educated about politics, but not all of them are. Adults may be more educated, and are also more mature. When I was 16, I didn't give a thought in the world about politics let alone voting.

Also, I don't think a high majority of [teens] care about politics.

Also, these teens would probably not have the mind of their own. Their parents would push them to the party they support at times. When you are an adult, you're parents don't always do so. 16 year olds would probably be uneducated, and the vote would be different from most adults.

In other words, I don't think 16 year olds should vote.

@ treat02

Exactly how is two years going to change anything from what you have just said?

@ The Master
When you become an adult, you learn to take responsibilities. Not all people vote but when you are an adult things become more accessible.

Some people might not even begin to vote until they are in their 20s.

At age 16, you are simply not being taught lots of politics at school, and most of people these ages aren't taught politics at home.

Two years can mean a lot, depending on what you go through, for example, when you are 11, then when you are 13.

@ The Master
You can die for your country. The reason we lowered the voting age in the first place was because if you can serve, you should be able to vote.

I think the common sense answer to that would be to stop letting minors enlist in the military, not lower the voting age.

@ Kurtni
Eighteen year olds aren't minors though.

treat02:

@ The Master
When you become an adult, you learn to take responsibilities. Not all people vote but when you are an adult things become more accessible.

Some people might not even begin to vote until they are in their 20s.

At age 16, you are simply not being taught lots of politics at school, and most of people these ages aren't taught politics at home.

Two years can mean a lot, depending on what you go through, for example, when you are 11, then when you are 13.

In this country, you can live your own life at sixteen. Have your own house, have a job, have a child and get married for goodness sake. Are these not responsibilities?

And I would suggest that few people over the age of 18 really passionately care about politics. Whilst I would not suggest that a voting age should be lowered without adequate changes to education, I would suggest that even from a young age, some are just not interested in politics. It was an optional subject for much of high school and the amount of politics that was mandatory was pitifully limited. I am therefore curious to know if there is some sort of special switch that goes off in people's heads when they are 18 which automatically makes them more informed.

Two years can indeed mean a lot but two years are relative. Two years very early in life has a dramatic effect whereas later it has little. I understand that there are biological changes but it hardly makes eighteen any better. If you wished to wait until the brain was fully formed then you ought to raise the voting age to twenty five.

dru's sick and tired:

@ The Master
You can die for your country. The reason we lowered the voting age in the first place was because if you can serve, you should be able to vote.

So sixteen year olds ought to be able to vote in the UK then?

@ The Master
I think any enlisted soldier should be able to vote, if its more than ROTC or school programs they are participating in. As in, they can be sent to a war zone.

@ dru's sick and tired

Well, yes. Sixteen year olds can join the actual military in this country. I'm not talking about things like Army Cadets or the like.

@ The Master
I wasn't sure and didn't want to assume. My stepdad enlisted at seventeen here, but that was only so he could attend basic training early. He couldn't be deployed.

@ The Master
In lots of countries politics are different.

Honestly, I think being an adult is when you should vote.

In the UK, at age 16, people may be different than people in America.

Just based off of maturity, most 16 year olds are not old enough to make a big decision like that. That said, there are also some that are very well-educated.

As you said about full brain development, you are an adult when you are 25. But the argument of voting age going up instead of down would be a very strong argument. Voting age should matter on maturity.

This might sound like an ignorant statement, but I consider adults more mature than teenagers. Actually, that's not an ignorant statement. But some adults aren't mature.

When you mentioned that 16 year olds may have a job (in America and France they do as well), a house, and married at times.

That said, do ALL sixteen year olds do that? I don't think so. Some of my friends live in the UK and they are 15/16 and they do not have that much responsibility.

@ dru's sick and tired

dru's sick and tired:

@ The Master
I think any enlisted soldier should be able to vote, if its more than ROTC or school programs they are participating in. As in, they can be sent to a war zone.

I agree. Serving for any military should get you the right to vote for the person that leads you.

WOAH!

I don't know why this topic is brought up.

An adult is an adult, and they should vote, not someone who's younger.

This makes me imagine some of the sixteen year old girls at my school voting.

I don't think anyone younger than 18 should vote.

@ Jenna's bloody.
Agreed. When I was in High School, girls around 16 didn't seem mature enough to vote. Their drama was funny, though.

@ treat02
I agree. 16 is not an adult, so I don't think that they are mature.

@ Jenna's a cutter.
What if they are enlisted in the military and can die for their country? If you can die for your country do you still think "too immature " to vote?

@ dru's sick and tired
Am I right you can serve in the military at 16 in England...?

Well, I guess in that case I think it would be fair...

Jenna's a cutter.:

@ treat02
I agree. 16 is not an adult, so I don't think that they are mature.

When I was 16, I was pretty mature and I was definitely invested in the election. I'm not saying that the voting age should be lowered, but that statement seems pretty...off to me. Being an adult doesn't equal automatic maturity.

@ independence.
But is every sixteen year old that way?

I've read some of your posts before, and I think you are just a smart type of person.