Lumifer comments on Arguments Against Speciesism - Less Wrong

28 Post author: Lukas_Gloor 28 July 2013 06:24PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (474)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: DanArmak 02 August 2013 07:36:34PM 3 points [-]

There aren't enough 12 year olds who would vote that they can vote in things which adults nearly universally disagree on.

That's true. Although, if they formed a voting block, it would be a significant one. But that's not the real reason why people don't want teenagers to vote.

I think it's more of a feeling of what it means to be a full citizen with voting rights. People wouldn't want to make teenagers into an oppressed minority that was denied full rights because it kept getting outvoted; it would feel unpleasant, scary and antagonistic.

Also, people under 18 are already permitted to have sex

That varies a lot between countries. Very few places have age of consent as low as 12-14 (puberty).

I also would like to note that it would be odd to apply a phrase like permitted to have sex to someone who was otherwise a full, voting citizen.

Comment author: Lumifer 02 August 2013 07:58:53PM 6 points [-]

it would be odd to apply a phrase like permitted to have sex to someone who was otherwise a full, voting citizen.

How about applying a phrase permitted to have a beer to someone who is a full, voting citizen?

Comment author: OnTheOtherHandle 07 August 2013 07:02:12AM 1 point [-]

The supposed reason for the 21 year old drinking age is that the prefrontal cortex, which is in charge of impulse control, doesn't fully mature until the early twenties, and therefore alcohol use before 21 would a) result in more mishaps like car accidents than alcohol use after 21, and b) harm brain development during a critical period. Which would be perfectly sound reasoning if it applied to voting, military service, cigarettes, lottery tickets, etc. If alcohol use is too risky because of an underdeveloped prefrontal cortex, then surely voting is too? But if you raised the voting age to 21 you'd have to raise the draft age, too, because it would be barbaric to send people off to die without even a nominal say in the decision to go to war. It's far more practical to lower the drinking age.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 07 August 2013 07:57:46AM -1 points [-]

Which would be perfectly sound reasoning if it applied to voting, military service, cigarettes, lottery tickets, etc. If alcohol use is too risky because of an underdeveloped prefrontal cortex, then surely voting is too?

Well for one thing alcohol's effect is to further impair the prefrontal cortex.

But if you raised the voting age to 21 you'd have to raise the draft age, too, because it would be barbaric to send people off to die without even a nominal say in the decision to go to war.

Taboo "barbaric".

Comment author: Jiro 02 August 2013 08:03:41PM *  1 point [-]

I won't argue for the 21 year drinking age. For one thing, it was passed by federal governmental overreach (taking money from the states and not giving it back unless they passed a drinking age law).