View Single Post
  #75 (permalink)  
Old 06-18-2008, 04:48 PM
SpotsCat's Avatar
SpotsCat SpotsCat is offline
Sr. Correspondent
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Jackson, Mississippi
Posts: 546
us mississippi
SpotsCat is a splendid one to beholdSpotsCat is a splendid one to beholdSpotsCat is a splendid one to beholdSpotsCat is a splendid one to beholdSpotsCat is a splendid one to beholdSpotsCat is a splendid one to beholdSpotsCat is a splendid one to behold
Credits: 24,618
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JavaBlack View Post
Yes, just anyone should be able to vote. For two reasons.
1. Any "test" to determine who can vote will be arbitrary and biased to the political agenda of those who set it.
2. Voting determines legitimacy. It is more stable for those in power to have support from the masses, regardless of how dumb they may be.
Back in the days of "Jim Crow", literacy tests were used to disenfranchise black voters. As a result, voter literacy tests were outlawed.

Asking biased and arbitrary questions such as, "How many bubbles on a bar of soap?" or "How many grains of sand in an hourglass?" serve no purpose except to disqualify potential voters.

However, considering that more people are familiar with the contestants on "American Idol", than the justices on the Supreme Court - having a voter literacy test might not be such a bad idea.

The only fair, balanced, neutral literacy test I can think of that could be used, is the test used to become a United States citizen.

If you apply for citizenship in the United States, you have to pass the above test. It seems fair and logical to me that if you're going to vote and elect officials, you should be able to demonstrate a working knowledge of how the system operates.

The test I've hyperlinked to is 100 questions. I'd say that if you can't get at least 2/3rd's (66%) correct, you probably shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Comments anyone?
__________________
"Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others." - Groucho Marx

Reply With Quote