Most people here are generally in agreement that videogames can have a negative mental impact on young (not like, 15, 16) children, aren't they? Same with schlock gore films.
Um, no. I'm not.
At least, not in the absence of bad parenting. And even in that case, generally not, no.
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
For the record, I DON'T endorse this, because I'm living in the United States of Awesome, not Communist Fucking China.
But parents have GOT to take responsibility.
My issue with legislating game ratings has NOTHING to do with wanting kids to play thegames; I support strict industrial standards that prevent kids from getting a hold of these games.
My issue with legislation is A) the precedent it presents, and that it places responsibility on a clerk who has never met the kid before, rather than the parent, which is where it belongs.
Most people here are generally in agreement that videogames can have a negative mental impact on young (not like, 15, 16) children, aren't they? Same with schlock gore films.
Um, no. I'm not.
Would you watch Reservoir Dogs with your eight-year olds? Seriously, that comes under the "bad parenting" label for me, and most people I'd hope.
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
For the record, I DON'T endorse this, because I'm living in the United States of Awesome, not Communist Fucking China.
Because it's our god-given right to pump out child after child, suck off of welfare, and ignore and neglect children just because we like spreading our seed? If the prerequisite for having a child was being a good parent, I don't think there's any doubt the world would be a better place.
Most people here are generally in agreement that videogames can have a negative mental impact on young (not like, 15, 16) children, aren't they? Same with schlock gore films.
The latter are NOT legislated against, are they?
And games do not INHERENTLY have a negative impact; they only stand to possibly exacerbate a negative condition that is ALREADY there. Legislating for that reason would be like outlawing peanut butter, because some one might not realize thatthey are allergic.
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
For the record, I DON'T endorse this, because I'm living in the United States of Awesome, not Communist Fucking China.
Because it's our god-given right to pump out child after child, suck off of welfare, and ignore and neglect children just because we like spreading our seed? If the prerequisite for having a child was being a good parent, I don't think there's any doubt the world would be a better place.
Is that what I said?
I OBVIOUSLY support better parenting, but I don't think that our government should have control over thingslike that.
What the government needs to do is work on educating people better how to take care oftheir kids.
Most people here are generally in agreement that videogames can have a negative mental impact on young (not like, 15, 16) children, aren't they? Same with schlock gore films.
Um, no. I'm not.
Would you watch Reservoir Dogs with your eight-year olds? Seriously, that comes under the "bad parenting" label for me, and most people I'd hope.
Depends on the eight year old.
If you stop and pay attention to them, you'll find that every eight year old is different. Some are even more mature than some eightteen year olds.
Evander on
0
DyvionBack in Sunny Florida!!Registered Userregular
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Dyvion on
Steam: No Safety In Life
PSN: Dyvion -- Eternal: Dyvion+9393 -- Genshin Impact: Dyvion
Most people here are generally in agreement that videogames can have a negative mental impact on young (not like, 15, 16) children, aren't they? Same with schlock gore films.
Um, no. I'm not.
Would you watch Reservoir Dogs with your eight-year olds? Seriously, that comes under the "bad parenting" label for me, and most people I'd hope.
If my hypothetical eight-year old expressed an interest, I'd tell him I'd give him a chance, but I'd warn him that he probably won't like it, and he'd probably get nightmares. And even if he didn't, he probably wouldn't understand it anyways. If he insisted, and I as a parent felt like he was genuinely responsible enough to know what he wanted, I would allow him to sit down for a few minutes, and when the first hint of "mature" content came in, I'd stop, check with the kid, and make sure he understands it's all pretend, to tell a story, and if he's scared he should stop. This is something I'd repeat, explaining things if necessary, "these are bad men doing bad things, and that's why they're hurting people. Good people don't do these things."
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Most people here are generally in agreement that videogames can have a negative mental impact on young (not like, 15, 16) children, aren't they? Same with schlock gore films.
The latter are NOT legislated against, are they?
No, just adding them in to consideration for effect - since videogames are still way, way less violent than films. Which makes the moral panic over them really silly.
And games do not INHERENTLY have a negative impact; they only stand to possibly exacerbate a negative condition that is ALREADY there. Legislating for that reason would be like outlawing peanut butter, because some one might not realize thatthey are allergic.
Here's how I see it: The legally unenforced games ratings at the moment say "Hey, you probably shouldn't let your kid play this. It's not suitable for them. But in the end, make up your own mind case-by-case and child-by-child."
Legally enforced ratings says: "Hey, you probably shouldn't let your kid play this. It's not suitable for them. Make up your own mind case-by-case and child-by-child, but we're not going to sell it to your child without you saying its okay."
What the government needs to do is work on educating people better how to take care oftheir kids.
That's a decent idea, but unless it's a required course, I'd imagine most people would never take it, or at the very least take it and forget about it soon after.
Most people here are generally in agreement that videogames can have a negative mental impact on young (not like, 15, 16) children, aren't they? Same with schlock gore films.
Um, no. I'm not.
Would you watch Reservoir Dogs with your eight-year olds? Seriously, that comes under the "bad parenting" label for me, and most people I'd hope.
If my hypothetical eight-year old expressed an interest, I'd tell him I'd give him a chance, but I'd warn him that he probably won't like it, and he'd probably get nightmares. And even if he didn't, he probably wouldn't understand it anyways. If he insisted, and I as a parent felt like he was genuinely responsible enough to know what he wanted, I would allow him to sit down for a few minutes, and when the first hint of "
mature" content came in, I'd stop, check with the kid, and make sure he understands it's all pretend, to tell a story, and if he's scared he should stop. This is something I'd repeat, explaining things if necessary, "these are bad men doing bad things, and that's why they're hurting people. Good people don't do these things."
I don't see this as bad parenting.
But how can you enjoy the movie when you have to keep stopping it to explain to the kid? :rotate:
What the government needs to do is work on educating people better how to take care oftheir kids.
That's a decent idea, but unless it's a required course, I'd imagine most people would never take it, or at the very least take it and forget about it soon after.
Oh, it ought to be part of the public education system, and a legislated requirement for all equivalents.
Most people here are generally in agreement that videogames can have a negative mental impact on young (not like, 15, 16) children, aren't they? Same with schlock gore films.
Um, no. I'm not.
Would you watch Reservoir Dogs with your eight-year olds? Seriously, that comes under the "bad parenting" label for me, and most people I'd hope.
If my hypothetical eight-year old expressed an interest, I'd tell him I'd give him a chance, but I'd warn him that he probably won't like it, and he'd probably get nightmares. And even if he didn't, he probably wouldn't understand it anyways. If he insisted, and I as a parent felt like he was genuinely responsible enough to know what he wanted, I would allow him to sit down for a few minutes, and when the first hint of "
mature" content came in, I'd stop, check with the kid, and make sure he understands it's all pretend, to tell a story, and if he's scared he should stop. This is something I'd repeat, explaining things if necessary, "these are bad men doing bad things, and that's why they're hurting people. Good people don't do these things."
I don't see this as bad parenting.
But how can you enjoy the movie when you have to keep stopping it to explain to the kid? :rotate:
Hey, that's a sacrifice you make to be a good parent, IMO. However, I think that educating your child can be just as rewarding as a good movie. If you're open about this stuff, the child may gradually come to understand these sorts of films, and may grow to like them. Then, this becomes an experience you share, not one that he gets on his own completely separate from you. He's going to watch a violent movie sooner or later (and probably sooner rather than later), so I think it's a far better idea for him to do it with a responsible adult to be there saying "that's a bad man doing bad things".
CaspianX on
0
DyvionBack in Sunny Florida!!Registered Userregular
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Why do you hate freedom?
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
Dyvion on
Steam: No Safety In Life
PSN: Dyvion -- Eternal: Dyvion+9393 -- Genshin Impact: Dyvion
Most people here are generally in agreement that videogames can have a negative mental impact on young (not like, 15, 16) children, aren't they? Same with schlock gore films.
The latter are NOT legislated against, are they?
No, just adding them in to consideration for effect - since videogames are still way, way less violent than films. Which makes the moral panic over them really silly.
And games do not INHERENTLY have a negative impact; they only stand to possibly exacerbate a negative condition that is ALREADY there. Legislating for that reason would be like outlawing peanut butter, because some one might not realize thatthey are allergic.
Here's how I see it: The legally unenforced games ratings at the moment say "Hey, you probably shouldn't let your kid play this. It's not suitable for them. But in the end, make up your own mind case-by-case and child-by-child."
Legally enforced ratings says: "Hey, you probably shouldn't let your kid play this. It's not suitable for them. Make up your own mind case-by-case and child-by-child, but we're not going to sell it to your child without you saying its okay."
Honestly, if you want your child to have to check in with you before buying things, then DO NOT GIVE THEM MONEY.
As a parent, you actually have the legal authority to take away money from them, even if they obtain it from an outside source.
Or are you fine with porn and pot being sold freely to minors too?
Okay now this is some serious bullshit. "You think restricting the sale of M-rated games to minors would be relatively ineffective at actually preventing minors from playing said games, therefore you think that minors should be allowed to smoke pot and look at pornography."
If you think enforcing game ratings is pointless because it would be ineffective, then logically you must think the same about porn. Do you?
What I am against is implementing new useless legislation. Yes, in the age of the internet, the laws restricting the sale of pornography to minors is completely ineffective. Should they change the law? No, it doesn't matter. There's no benefit in keeping the law, but there is also no benefit in dropping the law either.
New legislation costs money (and let's not kid ourselves, the only way to get this age-restriction system working in the US is through legislation). Why waste taxpayer money creating and passing a bill for a system that won't even really be effective and also set a bad precedent for future restrictions?
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Why do you hate freedom?
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
I'll say this for the idea - it'll certainly make voters far less likely to approve an administration who will send military forces halfway around the world to fight in a country they don't know with people they don't understand for vague reasons they don't comprehend.
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Why do you hate freedom?
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
I don't think you understand exactly how a GED works, or what is required, education wise, of a burger flipper...
But anyway, the beauty of America is that we do not exclude some of our residents from being citizens based on certain obligations, because those sorts of rules can be misused and abused. Mandatory military service is one thing, and while I don't support it, I don't see it as some great evil, but tying it to voting rights is wrong.
Or are you fine with porn and pot being sold freely to minors too?
Okay now this is some serious bullshit. "You think restricting the sale of M-rated games to minors would be relatively ineffective at actually preventing minors from playing said games, therefore you think that minors should be allowed to smoke pot and look at pornography."
If you think enforcing game ratings is pointless because it would be ineffective, then logically you must think the same about porn. Do you?
What I am against is implementing new useless legislation. Yes, in the age of the internet, the laws restricting the sale of pornography to minors is completely ineffective. Should they change the law? No, it doesn't matter. There's no benefit in keeping the law, but there is also no benefit in dropping the law either.
New legislation costs money (and let's not kid ourselves, the only way to get this age-restriction system working in the US is through legislation). Why waste taxpayer money creating and passing a bill for a system that won't even really be effective and also set a bad precedent for future restrictions?
Especially when there are already laws on the vbooks that can be used to this end.
Don't trust your kid with money? Then don't let him have any.
Don't ask for extra legislation just because you don't want tobe the bad guy to your kid.
Evander on
0
DyvionBack in Sunny Florida!!Registered Userregular
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Why do you hate freedom?
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
I'll say this for the idea - it'll certainly make voters far less likely to approve an administration who will send military forces halfway around the world to fight in a country they don't know with people they don't understand for vague reasons they don't comprehend.
Well there ya go. Now you've done it. See, I was being nice. Now I'm not happy. As I said before, I Love Freedom. I want -everyone- to be free. And when I say everyone, I even mean the people on the other side of the world whose governments are murdering them remorselessly. I am a member of the profession of arms, and I am very proud of it. I have no qualms saying I would risk my life to protect your right to post whatever you want to say on this message board. I also have no qualms saying that I would do the same for someone I don't know in a country I don't know with people I don't understand for reasons I'm quite well aware of. I guess that's the difference between you and me.
Dyvion on
Steam: No Safety In Life
PSN: Dyvion -- Eternal: Dyvion+9393 -- Genshin Impact: Dyvion
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Why do you hate freedom?
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
I'll say this for the idea - it'll certainly make voters far less likely to approve an administration who will send military forces halfway around the world to fight in a country they don't know with people they don't understand for vague reasons they don't comprehend.
Well there ya go. Now you've done it. See, I was being nice. Now I'm not happy. As I said before, I Love Freedom. I want -everyone- to be free. And when I say everyone, I even mean the people on the other side of the world whose governments are murdering them remorselessly. I am a member of the profession of arms, and I am very proud of it. I have no qualms saying I would risk my life to protect your right to post whatever you want to say on this message board. I also have no qualms saying that I would do the same for someone I don't know in a country I don't know with people I don't understand for reasons I'm quite well aware of. I guess that's the difference between you and me.
No, that's the difference between what I said and what you said.
Edit: To clarify, if you believe you know what you're fighting for, and you believe it's worth fighting for, more power to ya'. I was talking about people who sent human beings into danger's path without any real idea why (or voted for those who would, which is more or less the same thing).
CaspianX on
0
DyvionBack in Sunny Florida!!Registered Userregular
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Why do you hate freedom?
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
I don't think you understand exactly how a GED works, or what is required, education wise, of a burger flipper...
But anyway, the beauty of America is that we do not exclude some of our residents from being citizens based on certain obligations, because those sorts of rules can be misused and abused. Mandatory military service is one thing, and while I don't support it, I don't see it as some great evil, but tying it to voting rights is wrong.
You can very well still be a citizen without voting rights. You enjoy all the freedoms without having to tromp down to the polling booths every few months. Do you want to make a difference? Contribute to society for a fraction of your life first.
Dyvion on
Steam: No Safety In Life
PSN: Dyvion -- Eternal: Dyvion+9393 -- Genshin Impact: Dyvion
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Why do you hate freedom?
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
I don't think you understand exactly how a GED works, or what is required, education wise, of a burger flipper...
But anyway, the beauty of America is that we do not exclude some of our residents from being citizens based on certain obligations, because those sorts of rules can be misused and abused. Mandatory military service is one thing, and while I don't support it, I don't see it as some great evil, but tying it to voting rights is wrong.
You can very well still be a citizen without voting rights. You enjoy all the freedoms without having to tromp down to the polling booths every few months. Do you want to make a difference? Contribute to society for a fraction of your life first.
Wonderful fascist utopia you've envisioned.
I am NOT lookign to belittle your chosen proffession in any way, but there are a myriad of necessary positions within society which are JUST AS important. Why would armed service have some special staus, but teaching, or science, or economics, etc., would not?
Evander on
0
DyvionBack in Sunny Florida!!Registered Userregular
edited April 2008
Uh... I didn't edit in the community service portion or anything... so I'm reasonably sure you read it... so I'm just going to assume you don't think teaching etc. are a community service.
e: recap removed.
Dyvion on
Steam: No Safety In Life
PSN: Dyvion -- Eternal: Dyvion+9393 -- Genshin Impact: Dyvion
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Why do you hate freedom?
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
I don't think you understand exactly how a GED works, or what is required, education wise, of a burger flipper...
But anyway, the beauty of America is that we do not exclude some of our residents from being citizens based on certain obligations, because those sorts of rules can be misused and abused. Mandatory military service is one thing, and while I don't support it, I don't see it as some great evil, but tying it to voting rights is wrong.
You can very well still be a citizen without voting rights. You enjoy all the freedoms without having to tromp down to the polling booths every few months. Do you want to make a difference? Contribute to society for a fraction of your life first.
Wonderful fascist utopia you've envisioned.
I am NOT lookign to belittle your chosen proffession in any way, but there are a myriad of necessary positions within society which are JUST AS important. Why would armed service have some special staus, but teaching, or science, or economics, etc., would not?
Uh... I didn't edit in the community service portion or anything... so I'm reasonably sure you read it... so I'm just going to assume you don't think teaching etc. are a community service.
Hey, I wouldn't mind if voting required a reasonable amount of community service, provided it's extremely accessible (and doesn't have any privileged requirements) , and doesn't require you to actually risk your life. Hey, I respect our armed forces, and I don't mind doing my part for my country, but I'm a coward through and through. Actually, I'd settle for a simple quiz. You know "who is the current president? What party is he a member of? How many states are there?" kinda' thing.
Uh... I didn't edit in the community service portion or anything... so I'm reasonably sure you read it... so I'm just going to assume you don't think teaching etc. are a community service.
e: recap removed.
I have never seen teaching, as a profession, considered as part of "community service".
Community service generally reffers to volunteer work, usually unskilled labor.
If you're looking to expand it from just military service in to "something that benefits society", then you run in to a HUGE issue of subjectivity. IMO, we should do our darndest to keep the government away from subjective legislation.
Also, what about folks who simply haveno ability to serve our country in any regard? Should they be denied a vote?
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Why do you hate freedom?
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
I don't think you understand exactly how a GED works, or what is required, education wise, of a burger flipper...
But anyway, the beauty of America is that we do not exclude some of our residents from being citizens based on certain obligations, because those sorts of rules can be misused and abused. Mandatory military service is one thing, and while I don't support it, I don't see it as some great evil, but tying it to voting rights is wrong.
You can very well still be a citizen without voting rights. You enjoy all the freedoms without having to tromp down to the polling booths every few months. Do you want to make a difference? Contribute to society for a fraction of your life first.
Wonderful fascist utopia you've envisioned.
I am NOT lookign to belittle your chosen proffession in any way, but there are a myriad of necessary positions within society which are JUST AS important. Why would armed service have some special staus, but teaching, or science, or economics, etc., would not?
Uh... I didn't edit in the community service portion or anything... so I'm reasonably sure you read it... so I'm just going to assume you don't think teaching etc. are a community service.
Hey, I wouldn't mind if voting required a reasonable amount of community service, provided it's extremely accessible (and doesn't have any privileged requirements) , and doesn't require you to actually risk your life. Hey, I respect our armed forces, and I don't mind doing my part for my country, but I'm a coward through and through. Actually, I'd settle for a simple quiz. You know "who is the current president? What party is he a member of? How many states are there?" kinda' thing.
That sort of quiz is the exact type of thing that they used in the past to keep black folks from voting.
Voting is the INSTRINSIC right of every American. It needs to be MORE accessable, not less.
I'm in favor of lowering the voting age. I say 14, which is when you can legally start working. I was paying taxes when I was 14 years old, I see no reason why I shouldn't have been voting too. I was definitely well informed back then, probably better than I am now, honestly.
Evander on
0
DyvionBack in Sunny Florida!!Registered Userregular
If you're looking to expand it from just military service in to "something that benefits society", then you run in to a HUGE issue of subjectivity. IMO, we should do our darndest to keep the government away from subjective legislation.
Also, what about folks who simply have no ability to serve our country in any regard? Should they be denied a vote?
Hmm... The only people I can think of that have no ability to serve our country in any regard are criminals in prison, people in a coma... and... uh... none of them vote anyway. If somehow you're implying that competency should be required to vote, then yes, I believe you should be required to meet the criteria for being competent in court to vote.
Dyvion on
Steam: No Safety In Life
PSN: Dyvion -- Eternal: Dyvion+9393 -- Genshin Impact: Dyvion
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Why do you hate freedom?
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
I don't think you understand exactly how a GED works, or what is required, education wise, of a burger flipper...
But anyway, the beauty of America is that we do not exclude some of our residents from being citizens based on certain obligations, because those sorts of rules can be misused and abused. Mandatory military service is one thing, and while I don't support it, I don't see it as some great evil, but tying it to voting rights is wrong.
You can very well still be a citizen without voting rights. You enjoy all the freedoms without having to tromp down to the polling booths every few months. Do you want to make a difference? Contribute to society for a fraction of your life first.
Wonderful fascist utopia you've envisioned.
I am NOT lookign to belittle your chosen proffession in any way, but there are a myriad of necessary positions within society which are JUST AS important. Why would armed service have some special staus, but teaching, or science, or economics, etc., would not?
Uh... I didn't edit in the community service portion or anything... so I'm reasonably sure you read it... so I'm just going to assume you don't think teaching etc. are a community service.
Hey, I wouldn't mind if voting required a reasonable amount of community service, provided it's extremely accessible (and doesn't have any privileged requirements) , and doesn't require you to actually risk your life. Hey, I respect our armed forces, and I don't mind doing my part for my country, but I'm a coward through and through. Actually, I'd settle for a simple quiz. You know "who is the current president? What party is he a member of? How many states are there?" kinda' thing.
That sort of quiz is the exact type of thing that they used in the past to keep black folks from voting.
Voting is the INSTRINSIC right of every American. It needs to be MORE accessable, not less.
I'm in favor of lowering the voting age. I say 14, which is when you can legally start working. I was paying taxes when I was 14 years old, I see no reason why I shouldn't have been voting too. I was definitely well informed back then, probably better than I am now, honestly.
How does basic knowledge have anything to do with race? I don't see any downside in requiring voters to be at least a little informed about what they're voting for and about.
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Why do you hate freedom?
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
I don't think you understand exactly how a GED works, or what is required, education wise, of a burger flipper...
But anyway, the beauty of America is that we do not exclude some of our residents from being citizens based on certain obligations, because those sorts of rules can be misused and abused. Mandatory military service is one thing, and while I don't support it, I don't see it as some great evil, but tying it to voting rights is wrong.
You can very well still be a citizen without voting rights. You enjoy all the freedoms without having to tromp down to the polling booths every few months. Do you want to make a difference? Contribute to society for a fraction of your life first.
Wonderful fascist utopia you've envisioned.
I am NOT lookign to belittle your chosen proffession in any way, but there are a myriad of necessary positions within society which are JUST AS important. Why would armed service have some special staus, but teaching, or science, or economics, etc., would not?
Uh... I didn't edit in the community service portion or anything... so I'm reasonably sure you read it... so I'm just going to assume you don't think teaching etc. are a community service.
Hey, I wouldn't mind if voting required a reasonable amount of community service, provided it's extremely accessible (and doesn't have any privileged requirements) , and doesn't require you to actually risk your life. Hey, I respect our armed forces, and I don't mind doing my part for my country, but I'm a coward through and through. Actually, I'd settle for a simple quiz. You know "who is the current president? What party is he a member of? How many states are there?" kinda' thing.
That sort of quiz is the exact type of thing that they used in the past to keep black folks from voting.
Voting is the INSTRINSIC right of every American. It needs to be MORE accessable, not less.
I'm in favor of lowering the voting age. I say 14, which is when you can legally start working. I was paying taxes when I was 14 years old, I see no reason why I shouldn't have been voting too. I was definitely well informed back then, probably better than I am now, honestly.
How does basic knowledge have anything to do with race? I don't see any downside in requiring voters to be at least a little informed about what they're voting for and about.
School system funding is tied to property taxes.
Meaning that poorer kids are less well educated.
The number of states in the UNion may seem like a simple bit of info to you, but it's a bit different if no one ever taught it to you.
If you're looking to expand it from just military service in to "something that benefits society", then you run in to a HUGE issue of subjectivity. IMO, we should do our darndest to keep the government away from subjective legislation.
Also, what about folks who simply have no ability to serve our country in any regard? Should they be denied a vote?
Hmm... The only people I can think of that have no ability to serve our country in any regard are criminals in prison, people in a coma... and... uh... none of them vote anyway. If somehow you're implying that competency should be required to vote, then yes, I believe you should be required to meet the criteria for being competent in court to vote.
You're being very coy about outlining your idea of "service", so I cn't give any specific examples, but suffice to say, they will ALWAYS be exceptions, and it realluy bothers me the fact that you are okay with the idea of some folks just being left out in the cold.
This country was founded in order to give people rights. You are advocating changing the costitution in order to REDUCE people's rights. THAT is fucked up, IMO.
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Why do you hate freedom?
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
I don't think you understand exactly how a GED works, or what is required, education wise, of a burger flipper...
But anyway, the beauty of America is that we do not exclude some of our residents from being citizens based on certain obligations, because those sorts of rules can be misused and abused. Mandatory military service is one thing, and while I don't support it, I don't see it as some great evil, but tying it to voting rights is wrong.
You can very well still be a citizen without voting rights. You enjoy all the freedoms without having to tromp down to the polling booths every few months. Do you want to make a difference? Contribute to society for a fraction of your life first.
Wonderful fascist utopia you've envisioned.
I am NOT lookign to belittle your chosen proffession in any way, but there are a myriad of necessary positions within society which are JUST AS important. Why would armed service have some special staus, but teaching, or science, or economics, etc., would not?
Uh... I didn't edit in the community service portion or anything... so I'm reasonably sure you read it... so I'm just going to assume you don't think teaching etc. are a community service.
Hey, I wouldn't mind if voting required a reasonable amount of community service, provided it's extremely accessible (and doesn't have any privileged requirements) , and doesn't require you to actually risk your life. Hey, I respect our armed forces, and I don't mind doing my part for my country, but I'm a coward through and through. Actually, I'd settle for a simple quiz. You know "who is the current president? What party is he a member of? How many states are there?" kinda' thing.
That sort of quiz is the exact type of thing that they used in the past to keep black folks from voting.
Voting is the INSTRINSIC right of every American. It needs to be MORE accessable, not less.
I'm in favor of lowering the voting age. I say 14, which is when you can legally start working. I was paying taxes when I was 14 years old, I see no reason why I shouldn't have been voting too. I was definitely well informed back then, probably better than I am now, honestly.
How does basic knowledge have anything to do with race? I don't see any downside in requiring voters to be at least a little informed about what they're voting for and about.
School system funding is tied to property taxes.
Meaning that poorer kids are less well educated.
The number of states in the UNion may seem like a simple bit of info to you, but it's a bit different if no one ever taught it to you.
Well, if that's really an issue, they can hand out booklets that contain the answers to anyone who wants to know. If they can make it to a voting station, they can make it there a few weeks prior so they're informed.
I'm in favor of lowering the voting age. I say 14, which is when you can legally start working. I was paying taxes when I was 14 years old, I see no reason why I shouldn't have been voting too. I was definitely well informed back then, probably better than I am now, honestly.
I've always said this too. When I was 15 I had a job. I paid my taxes. I probably got most of them back at the end of the year, but it still never made sense to me that you were mature enough for them to take your money, but not mature enough to vote.
Regardless, this idea that you have to "contribute to society" in order to have the right to vote is just ludicrous and demeaning to half the professions out there. Is a McDonalds employee not contributing to society while an officer in the Army is somehow? I think its great that people do serve, and I'm kinda in favor of dropping the last two years of high school (which were useless for me) and implementing a "service" requirement where kids could join the Army or Peace Corps or something (which would give everyone a chance to see a bit more of the world). But I don't think that a job, test scores, or hobbies should ever be used to place value on a person.
It would make FAR more sense to force people to obtain a license for having kids.
This is something I fully endorse. There are way too many people out there who absolutely should not have kids. Sadly, these people tend to be the likeliest to have as many kids as possible.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
Why do you hate freedom?
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
I don't think you understand exactly how a GED works, or what is required, education wise, of a burger flipper...
But anyway, the beauty of America is that we do not exclude some of our residents from being citizens based on certain obligations, because those sorts of rules can be misused and abused. Mandatory military service is one thing, and while I don't support it, I don't see it as some great evil, but tying it to voting rights is wrong.
You can very well still be a citizen without voting rights. You enjoy all the freedoms without having to tromp down to the polling booths every few months. Do you want to make a difference? Contribute to society for a fraction of your life first.
Wonderful fascist utopia you've envisioned.
I am NOT lookign to belittle your chosen proffession in any way, but there are a myriad of necessary positions within society which are JUST AS important. Why would armed service have some special staus, but teaching, or science, or economics, etc., would not?
Uh... I didn't edit in the community service portion or anything... so I'm reasonably sure you read it... so I'm just going to assume you don't think teaching etc. are a community service.
Hey, I wouldn't mind if voting required a reasonable amount of community service, provided it's extremely accessible (and doesn't have any privileged requirements) , and doesn't require you to actually risk your life. Hey, I respect our armed forces, and I don't mind doing my part for my country, but I'm a coward through and through. Actually, I'd settle for a simple quiz. You know "who is the current president? What party is he a member of? How many states are there?" kinda' thing.
That sort of quiz is the exact type of thing that they used in the past to keep black folks from voting.
Voting is the INSTRINSIC right of every American. It needs to be MORE accessable, not less.
I'm in favor of lowering the voting age. I say 14, which is when you can legally start working. I was paying taxes when I was 14 years old, I see no reason why I shouldn't have been voting too. I was definitely well informed back then, probably better than I am now, honestly.
How does basic knowledge have anything to do with race? I don't see any downside in requiring voters to be at least a little informed about what they're voting for and about.
School system funding is tied to property taxes.
Meaning that poorer kids are less well educated.
The number of states in the UNion may seem like a simple bit of info to you, but it's a bit different if no one ever taught it to you.
Well, if that's really an issue, they can hand out booklets that contain the answers to anyone who wants to know. If they can make it to a voting station, they can make it there a few weeks prior so they're informed.
Then what's the point? It's just setting up a hurdle for no reason.
Posts
Um, no. I'm not.
At least, not in the absence of bad parenting. And even in that case, generally not, no.
For the record, I DON'T endorse this, because I'm living in the United States of Awesome, not Communist Fucking China.
But parents have GOT to take responsibility.
My issue with legislating game ratings has NOTHING to do with wanting kids to play thegames; I support strict industrial standards that prevent kids from getting a hold of these games.
My issue with legislation is A) the precedent it presents, and
Would you watch Reservoir Dogs with your eight-year olds? Seriously, that comes under the "bad parenting" label for me, and most people I'd hope.
Because it's our god-given right to pump out child after child, suck off of welfare, and ignore and neglect children just because we like spreading our seed? If the prerequisite for having a child was being a good parent, I don't think there's any doubt the world would be a better place.
The latter are NOT legislated against, are they?
And games do not INHERENTLY have a negative impact; they only stand to possibly exacerbate a negative condition that is ALREADY there. Legislating for that reason would be like outlawing peanut butter, because some one might not realize thatthey are allergic.
Is that what I said?
I OBVIOUSLY support better parenting, but I don't think that our government should have control over thingslike that.
What the government needs to do is work on educating people better how to take care oftheir kids.
Depends on the eight year old.
If you stop and pay attention to them, you'll find that every eight year old is different. Some are even more mature than some eightteen year olds.
Also, while we're at it, a couple years military service (or equivalent community benefit program, possibly 24 months volunteer work) should be required before you can vote.
PSN: Dyvion -- Eternal: Dyvion+9393 -- Genshin Impact: Dyvion
If my hypothetical eight-year old expressed an interest, I'd tell him I'd give him a chance, but I'd warn him that he probably won't like it, and he'd probably get nightmares. And even if he didn't, he probably wouldn't understand it anyways. If he insisted, and I as a parent felt like he was genuinely responsible enough to know what he wanted, I would allow him to sit down for a few minutes, and when the first hint of "mature" content came in, I'd stop, check with the kid, and make sure he understands it's all pretend, to tell a story, and if he's scared he should stop. This is something I'd repeat, explaining things if necessary, "these are bad men doing bad things, and that's why they're hurting people. Good people don't do these things."
I don't see this as bad parenting.
Why do you hate freedom?
Here's how I see it: The legally unenforced games ratings at the moment say "Hey, you probably shouldn't let your kid play this. It's not suitable for them. But in the end, make up your own mind case-by-case and child-by-child."
Legally enforced ratings says: "Hey, you probably shouldn't let your kid play this. It's not suitable for them. Make up your own mind case-by-case and child-by-child, but we're not going to sell it to your child without you saying its okay."
That's a decent idea, but unless it's a required course, I'd imagine most people would never take it, or at the very least take it and forget about it soon after.
But how can you enjoy the movie when you have to keep stopping it to explain to the kid? :rotate:
Oh, it ought to be part of the public education system, and a legislated requirement for all equivalents.
Economics should be too.
Seriously, our education inthis country is SHIT.
Hey, that's a sacrifice you make to be a good parent, IMO. However, I think that educating your child can be just as rewarding as a good movie. If you're open about this stuff, the child may gradually come to understand these sorts of films, and may grow to like them. Then, this becomes an experience you share, not one that he gets on his own completely separate from you. He's going to watch a violent movie sooner or later (and probably sooner rather than later), so I think it's a far better idea for him to do it with a responsible adult to be there saying "that's a bad man doing bad things".
On the contrary. I love freedom. I was making a point.
(But there are several countries that require their citizens to fullful military citizenship currently, and they do quite fine, so I'm told. And if it's implemented correctly it would just be another stepping stone in life. It's almost mandatory at this point to complete Highschool if you want to go anywhere meaningful with your life. The alternative is a GED if you just enjoy flipping burgers. There are very few exceptions to the above.)
PSN: Dyvion -- Eternal: Dyvion+9393 -- Genshin Impact: Dyvion
Honestly, if you want your child to have to check in with you before buying things, then DO NOT GIVE THEM MONEY.
As a parent, you actually have the legal authority to take away money from them, even if they obtain it from an outside source.
What I am against is implementing new useless legislation. Yes, in the age of the internet, the laws restricting the sale of pornography to minors is completely ineffective. Should they change the law? No, it doesn't matter. There's no benefit in keeping the law, but there is also no benefit in dropping the law either.
New legislation costs money (and let's not kid ourselves, the only way to get this age-restriction system working in the US is through legislation). Why waste taxpayer money creating and passing a bill for a system that won't even really be effective and also set a bad precedent for future restrictions?
I'll say this for the idea - it'll certainly make voters far less likely to approve an administration who will send military forces halfway around the world to fight in a country they don't know with people they don't understand for vague reasons they don't comprehend.
I don't think you understand exactly how a GED works, or what is required, education wise, of a burger flipper...
But anyway, the beauty of America is that we do not exclude some of our residents from being citizens based on certain obligations, because those sorts of rules can be misused and abused. Mandatory military service is one thing, and while I don't support it, I don't see it as some great evil, but tying it to voting rights is wrong.
Especially when there are already laws on the vbooks that can be used to this end.
Don't trust your kid with money? Then don't let him have any.
Don't ask for extra legislation just because you don't want tobe the bad guy to your kid.
Well there ya go. Now you've done it. See, I was being nice. Now I'm not happy. As I said before, I Love Freedom. I want -everyone- to be free. And when I say everyone, I even mean the people on the other side of the world whose governments are murdering them remorselessly. I am a member of the profession of arms, and I am very proud of it. I have no qualms saying I would risk my life to protect your right to post whatever you want to say on this message board. I also have no qualms saying that I would do the same for someone I don't know in a country I don't know with people I don't understand for reasons I'm quite well aware of. I guess that's the difference between you and me.
PSN: Dyvion -- Eternal: Dyvion+9393 -- Genshin Impact: Dyvion
No, that's the difference between what I said and what you said.
Edit: To clarify, if you believe you know what you're fighting for, and you believe it's worth fighting for, more power to ya'. I was talking about people who sent human beings into danger's path without any real idea why (or voted for those who would, which is more or less the same thing).
You can very well still be a citizen without voting rights. You enjoy all the freedoms without having to tromp down to the polling booths every few months. Do you want to make a difference? Contribute to society for a fraction of your life first.
PSN: Dyvion -- Eternal: Dyvion+9393 -- Genshin Impact: Dyvion
On that note: Jack Thompson is a tool.
Wonderful fascist utopia you've envisioned.
I am NOT lookign to belittle your chosen proffession in any way, but there are a myriad of necessary positions within society which are JUST AS important. Why would armed service have some special staus, but teaching, or science, or economics, etc., would not?
e: recap removed.
PSN: Dyvion -- Eternal: Dyvion+9393 -- Genshin Impact: Dyvion
Hey, I wouldn't mind if voting required a reasonable amount of community service, provided it's extremely accessible (and doesn't have any privileged requirements) , and doesn't require you to actually risk your life. Hey, I respect our armed forces, and I don't mind doing my part for my country, but I'm a coward through and through. Actually, I'd settle for a simple quiz. You know "who is the current president? What party is he a member of? How many states are there?" kinda' thing.
I have never seen teaching, as a profession, considered as part of "community service".
Community service generally reffers to volunteer work, usually unskilled labor.
If you're looking to expand it from just military service in to "something that benefits society", then you run in to a HUGE issue of subjectivity. IMO, we should do our darndest to keep the government away from subjective legislation.
Also, what about folks who simply haveno ability to serve our country in any regard? Should they be denied a vote?
That sort of quiz is the exact type of thing that they used in the past to keep black folks from voting.
Voting is the INSTRINSIC right of every American. It needs to be MORE accessable, not less.
I'm in favor of lowering the voting age. I say 14, which is when you can legally start working. I was paying taxes when I was 14 years old, I see no reason why I shouldn't have been voting too. I was definitely well informed back then, probably better than I am now, honestly.
Hmm... The only people I can think of that have no ability to serve our country in any regard are criminals in prison, people in a coma... and... uh... none of them vote anyway. If somehow you're implying that competency should be required to vote, then yes, I believe you should be required to meet the criteria for being competent in court to vote.
PSN: Dyvion -- Eternal: Dyvion+9393 -- Genshin Impact: Dyvion
How does basic knowledge have anything to do with race? I don't see any downside in requiring voters to be at least a little informed about what they're voting for and about.
School system funding is tied to property taxes.
Meaning that poorer kids are less well educated.
The number of states in the UNion may seem like a simple bit of info to you, but it's a bit different if no one ever taught it to you.
You're being very coy about outlining your idea of "service", so I cn't give any specific examples, but suffice to say, they will ALWAYS be exceptions, and it realluy bothers me the fact that you are okay with the idea of some folks just being left out in the cold.
This country was founded in order to give people rights. You are advocating changing the costitution in order to REDUCE people's rights. THAT is fucked up, IMO.
Well, if that's really an issue, they can hand out booklets that contain the answers to anyone who wants to know. If they can make it to a voting station, they can make it there a few weeks prior so they're informed.
Regardless, this idea that you have to "contribute to society" in order to have the right to vote is just ludicrous and demeaning to half the professions out there. Is a McDonalds employee not contributing to society while an officer in the Army is somehow? I think its great that people do serve, and I'm kinda in favor of dropping the last two years of high school (which were useless for me) and implementing a "service" requirement where kids could join the Army or Peace Corps or something (which would give everyone a chance to see a bit more of the world). But I don't think that a job, test scores, or hobbies should ever be used to place value on a person.
Then what's the point? It's just setting up a hurdle for no reason.
Seriously?
I love how a thread about Jack Thompson can SOMEHOW work its way into this kind of discussion.
What part of military service gives you a greater understanding of economic policy?
Don't get me wrong, I have much respect for our service men and women, but I don't see how their choices are some how superior to my own.
Also, if I don't "earn" the right to vote, then does that mean that I don't have to pay taxes?