The opposition is great. Some adults object to teenagers having the vote because they beleive them to be inferior. It is suggested that young people cannot think out matters coolly and calmly. Others will not agree to youth suffrage because they do not want change. Teens have never voted before. Why should they start now?
- "Because [young people] are not capable of full citizenship, for the simple reason that they are not available for purposes of national... defence. All government rests ultimately on force, to which [young people], owing to physical, moral and social reasons, are not capable of contributing.
- Because there is little doubt that the vast majority of [teenagers] have no desire for the vote.
- Because the acquirement of the Parliamentary vote would logically involve admission to Parliament itself, and to all Government offices. It is scarcely possible to imagine a [teenager] being Minister for War, and yet the [introduction of teenaged suffrage would] involve that and many similar absurdities.
- Because past legislation in Parliament shows that the interests of [children and young people] are perfectly safe in the hands of [adults].
- Because [youth] Suffrage is based on the idea of the equality of [age], and tends to establish those competitive relations which will destroy... consideration [towards the ideal of innocence].
- Because the physical nature of [young people] unfits them for direct competition with [adults]."
Youth Suffrage. The arguments against it seem as patronising and prejudiced as those against female suffrage.
The youth of this nation are totally unrepresented in elections and in parliament. One could make the argument that "they don't understand the issues!" - well, such was the view of women 100 years ago. "But they have representation - their parents are voting on their behalf!" - well, a century ago the view was that a woman voted through her husband.
V0T3Z 4 TEH TE3NZ!
Baron Sam-a-D Grover
