March 18, 2019
Selwyn Duke has an outstanding article at The New American about the democrat scheme to lower the voting age.
From the article:
Question: If kids start learning about civics and government in middle school, will Pelosi support lowering the voting age to 12? If practical application at the point of first instruction is an imperative, does she support children having sex as soon as they’re given sex education?
[...]
Nonetheless, people who normally infantilize the young — wanting them to stay on their parents’ insurance till age 26, for instance — apparently believe they achieve situational maturity upon entering a voting booth.
For example, Oregon lawmakers proposed lowering the voting age late last year, with Democrat State Senator Shemia Fagan saying that 16-year-olds should have the chance "to participate in the ballot — about decisions that affect their homes, their clean air, their future, their schools and, as we’ve seen, their very lives.â€
Alright, but question: Why is 16 the magic number? Why not 10?
Don’t laugh. In 2017 I made the crack, "I’m just waiting for these leftists to echo NAMbLA and chant, ‘If they’re eight, it’s too late,’†but this has since apparently been trumped by reality. While it smacks of satire, Cambridge University head of politics, Professor David Runciman, seriously proposed last year lowering the voting age to six. A little crumb-cruncher is qualified as long as he can read, is his reasoning.
Read the whole thing at TNA.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:38 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 323 words, total size 3 kb.
Posted by: Kelly Reynolds at October 20, 2019 07:59 AM (3zc7E)
37 queries taking 1.2395 seconds, 160 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.