Who should be denied choice?

[Philosophy Explorer]

Some common examples are minors, the mentally deficient, prisoners, even the direct vote for US President is denied. It can change with the times, e.g. women at one time were denied the right to vote. Can this ever be settled?

PhilX

[bobevenson]

The title of this thread is not clear at all. If it is about being able to cast a vote in political elections, everybody should be able to vote or have a vote cast for them in their own best interests. This includes the criminally insane, prisoners and babies in utero.

[Philosophy Explorer]

The title of this thread is not clear at all. If it is about being able to cast a vote in political elections, everybody should be able to vote or have a vote cast for them in their own best interests. This includes the criminally insane, prisoners and babies in utero.

Do you count, e.g., the criminally insane as belonging to general society? And babies in utero is ridiculous as they haven't been born yet. And who decides what's in the others best interest?

PhilX

[bobevenson]

Everybody under the political control of a government has an inalienable right to vote. This includes everybody, regardless of physical or mental ability. If unable to vote, a surrogate should be appointed, for instance, the parent of a baby in utero.

[Lacewing]

Everybody under the political control of a government has an inalienable right to vote. This includes everybody, regardless of physical or mental ability. If unable to vote, a surrogate should be appointed, for instance, the parent of a baby in utero.

So a woman carrying triplets gets to cast her vote plus 3 votes for her babies?

What about dogs and cats? Shouldn't they get a vote about issues that affect them?

[Philosophy Explorer]

Everybody under the political control of a government has an inalienable right to vote. This includes everybody, regardless of physical or mental ability. If unable to vote, a surrogate should be appointed, for instance, the parent of a baby in utero.

What if the baby were triplets? Are you saying the triplets would all vote the same way? And by letting the parent vote on behalf of the baby is taking away the child's right to vote and giving it to the parents. Then are you saying that both the mother and the father have the right to vote on behalf of the child? And how old does the child have to be in order to vote? And since we're on the subject of voting, why are US citizens denied the direct vote for US President? Does your AEP have answers?

PhilX

[bobevenson]

Of course triplets would each have a vote, and it would be cast by one of their parents. As they are growing up, the parents would remain their surrogate until the parents decide they can vote on their own. This is how things would be properly handled under the AEP.

[Philosophy Explorer]

Of course triplets would each have a vote, and it would be cast by one of their parents. As they are growing up, the parents would remain their surrogate until the parents decide they can vote on their own. This is how things would be properly handled under the AEP.

Suppose the parents decided they won't relinquish their proxy power. That would make it like how the Communists ran their countries. Plus which parent gets to vote on behalf of the children?

PhilX

[wtf]

Do you count, e.g., the criminally insane as belonging to general society?
PhilX

Why not, many of them are our elected leaders.

[Philosophy Explorer]

Do you count, e.g., the criminally insane as belonging to general society?
PhilX

Why not, many of them are our elected leaders.

I think corrupt would be a better description for some of them.

PhilX

[Dalek Prime]

Everybody under the political control of a government has an inalienable right to vote. This includes everybody, regardless of physical or mental ability. If unable to vote, a surrogate should be appointed, for instance, the parent of a baby in utero.

Fuck you. A parent gets more than one vote, twat?

[bobevenson]

Of course triplets would each have a vote, and it would be cast by one of their parents. As they are growing up, the parents would remain their surrogate until the parents decide they can vote on their own. This is how things would be properly handled under the AEP.

Suppose the parents decided they won't relinquish their proxy power. That would make it like how the Communists ran their countries. Plus which parent gets to vote on behalf of the children?

PhilX

I guess as long as the parents are paying for everything and providing food and shelter, they can make that decision for their children. On the other hand, the children can just run away from home, OK?

[Lacewing]

Of course triplets would each have a vote, and it would be cast by one of their parents. As they are growing up, the parents would remain their surrogate until the parents decide they can vote on their own. This is how things would be properly handled under the AEP.

Are you assuming that the mother and father stay married and/or agree on everything? What planet is that? What if the mother and father belong to differing parties -- then who decides which way the triplet babies vote? What if the babies would prefer to exercise their right NOT to vote... and then they grow up being pissed off that they were used as a pawn by their deluded parent for political purposes that the baby would have opposed?

Would orphanages get to vote for all the orphans in their care?

[Philosophy Explorer]

Of course triplets would each have a vote, and it would be cast by one of their parents. As they are growing up, the parents would remain their surrogate until the parents decide they can vote on their own. This is how things would be properly handled under the AEP.

Suppose the parents decided they won't relinquish their proxy power. That would make it like how the Communists ran their countries. Plus which parent gets to vote on behalf of the children?

PhilX

I guess as long as the parents are paying for everything and providing food and shelter, they can make that decision for their children. On the other hand, the children can just run away from home, OK?

Sounds like vote buying. Your proposed system has a number of defects and you haven't addressed the issues I brought up.

PhilX

[bobevenson]

Everybody under the political control of a government has an inalienable right to vote. This includes everybody, regardless of physical or mental ability. If unable to vote, a surrogate should be appointed, for instance, the parent of a baby in utero.

Fuck you. A parent gets more than one vote, twat?

Unfortunately, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. What do you even mean, a parent gets more than one vote. The second, third, fourth or whatever the number of children he has, are being represented by those votes, as goddamn well they should, you fucking Socialist!