I think you shouldn't be allowed to comment. Because you clearly haven't though your position out very well. Do you also support disenfranchising the mentally disabled, such as people with Down's syndrome or autism?
I work as a Deputy Returning Officer for elections in Canada. This role (simply stated) involves distributing and counting ballots at a local polling station, and ensuring the Elections Act is followed. While I do not support disenfranchising the mentally disabled from voting, it should be recognized that often its a parent, spouse, or caregiver who is the one voting and making the choice for the mentally disabled voter. This can mean they are essentially voting twice, or more if they are assisting multiple people. In one case in the last federal election, I refused to allowed a man to assist both of his children to vote, instead his wife had to assist the second child. This was within the authority of the role and there was no problem.
As long as there are some safeguards in place the mentally disabled should be allowed to vote, or make the attempt. If you sat there for a few days and saw who came out to vote, you may rather wish they too weren't having an influence on helping to elect the next government or opposition parties.
This isn't about ego or arrogance. This is about the future of the United States of America.
I do not support disenfranchising the mentally disabled. If they are politically studied enough that they can make an intelligent decision about how to vote for somebody, then of course they should be able to vote.
Why should there be a different standard for them than for anybody else? A disability doesn't mean that discrimination is an absolute certainty.
> If they are politically studied enough that they can make an intelligent decision about how to vote for somebody, then of course they should be able to vote.
You do not get to define how well "studied" someone has to be to participate in voting. Anything you find acceptable is highly politicized and guarantees voter disenfranchisement for a number of groups of people.
I support a skills based test like LSAT for voting. It would be much less susceptible to manipulation and op-ed than knowledge-based voting. Sure, I think someone should know the Constitution to vote, but what if someone thinks I should know the Earth is 10,000 years old?
On the other hand, a test like LSAT that proves you can figure out logical fallacies would mean the stupidest of the stupid don't get to affect my life.
