Quote:
Originally posted by Kunst
It's not that insane or illogical. Why should people that barely have a decade to live, whose lives will be entirely unaffected by who the president is, have more say in a decision that someone who is young and will have to suffer the results for the rest of their lives? Like, this is the same argument I put forward when Brexit happened: a heavy amount of Trump support came from the elderly who have minds stuck in the decade they were teenagers, almost half a century ago, and think it's okay to make a whole generation trying to move forward, take a step backwards. It's very unfair, and quite terrifying if you ask me. Especially for, say, someone who's 17 and doesn't get to vote, to have less of a say in this than someone who will probably die before Trump even gets to the White House.
|
You do realize that elderly people play/ed a big part in deciding the present and future of the people in many socieites, right? Because a lot of past and present politicians are elderly people themselves.
Voting is not a privilege. It is an adult human right. Anyone who has reached the age of maturity can vote because they are equal adults before the law. Someone does not lessen in value based on amount of life he has left or on his ability to contribute to society. By that reasoning the poor, the infirm, the weak, the stupid, the oppressed, etc., should be barred from voting because it is not really their future either since they are putting in the least and reaping the least from it. At several points in history, different groups of people were denied their voting rights. If we are going to say we have a democracy, every adult gets to vote. Suggesting to disenfranche groups you disagree with shows a complete lack of respect for the ideal and tradition of democracy.
They're screwing us over
dont be so hard on her people