Ms Ryan said that she planned to introduce another private member's bill during the upcoming term of federal parliament, after an initial bill in 2018 failed to pass.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MisterFrog@aussie.zone -1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

This is fair, my language is perhaps a little strong. Still a distraction in my opinion.

Teenagers are in school, and many are very knowledgeable and engaged.

But I don't really think there is much need to change the voting age

[–] Ilandar@lemmy.today 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What is actually wrong with the proposal, though? Or are you simply objecting because the idea came from "the other side", even though The Greens have been pushing this since 2018?

[–] MisterFrog@aussie.zone 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm not necessarily opposed, but beyond "they deserve a say in their future" I'm not really sure what the argument for it is.

There's a lot of learning that goes on between the ages of 16 and 18. Like the level of stuff you're learning accelerates quite a lot.

While education isn't a pre-requisite for voting, we gotta set a line somewhere. 18 is the line we've set for a bunch of other things.

I would need more convincing that this line should be changed.

[–] Ilandar@lemmy.today 1 points 3 weeks ago

You're right, education is not a prerequisite. Neither is intelligence, or brain development, or familiarity with the political system, or any of the other tired old arguments right wingers repeat. No one 18 and upwards is tested against any of these metrics when they first enrol. 16 year olds can leave school (in some states), drive on public roads, work a regular full time week and pay taxes. These are all things that clearly distinguish them from children 15 and under, and someone who can legally do all of those things alongside adults obviously deserves the right to vote alongside us too.

It's quite ironic really that you were the one who tried to frame this as a right wing culture war issue, and yet your position is that of Pauline Hanson, leader of THE right wing culture war party in this country.

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah, you probably wouldn't see much need for it if you aren't sixteen. Meanwhile, if you were, you'd probably be sitting there wondering why the rest of us keep fluffing up the climate that you'd have to live with.

[–] MisterFrog@aussie.zone 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

When I was 16 I also didn't see much of a need for it (this topic is raised every couple of years). Even though I was much more engaged with politics than the average person at that age, at the time.

I'm not saying 16 year olds are unqualified to vote, but we gotta draw the line somewhere.

Adulthood isn't totally arbitrary because of how we've structured our society (though, the age at which this is, depends on when people are leaving school/are legally defined as independent).

The reason I think this is a distraction is because this has been suggested time and time again, and it's not likely to get off the ground and it wouldn't make huge swings in voter numbers.

I dunno. As in my edited comment, I just think Monique Ryan is a wanker, who I happen to agree with on wanting to do something urgently about the climate.

[–] small44@piefed.social 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

We can draw the line with 16 years since it's backed by science

https://www.unicef.ca/sites/default/files/2024-06/UNICEF%20_Canada_Policy_Brief_Bill_S-201_Lowering_the_Voting_Age.pdf

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

You also talked about, in that comment, the age all other things are defined as adulthood, but that's not even clear. Contract law says 18, unless you qualify for unreasonable to live at home, where you can sign contracts at 16. The driving age is 17 in several states. Medical privacy takes effect at 15. Age of consent nationwide is 16 (as long as the other person doesn't have a duty of care over you). So there's already a lot of precedent for a younger age of adulthood.

When I was 16, I was politically involved and I wanted to be able to vote. You could say that anything you're not motivated to care about is a distraction. Plenty of things are tried again in politics as the world progresses. That's like saying we should give up on climate change.

[–] MisterFrog@aussie.zone 2 points 3 weeks ago

You make valid points. I do think there's still quite a big shift in people's lives when they turn 18 (most), or rather, when they leave secondary school.

Much more so than when they turn 16.

And that learning accelerates a lot in the last 2 years of school.

I will say, I'm not 100% opposed.

And that my previous comments about this being a distraction were not fair statements.