# Lets look to the future: What is the next great civil rights movment in America? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 11, 2008, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774 "2008-12-11T21:50:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Lizard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/dfb087/32.png) [@Lizard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lizard)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/61 "2008-12-17T00:36:31Z")
I had an immediate mental answer to the question in the OP, and I went through this entire thread to see if anyone beat me to it. That no one has says something about who reads this Board. The next civil rights battle will be against **AGEISM** , i.e. prejudice against the elderly. Compared to the number of Baby Boomers nearing retirement, the numbers of people in each group listed in the OP is minuscule. Yet it is routine to let go of older workers in favor of cheaper, younger ones who demand less from their employer and have lowered expectations. [The Supreme Court may have struck against this recently](http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/21/opinion/21sat2.html?scp=3&sq=age+discrimination&st=nyt), but that these cases even arise says a lot about what is acceptable in the workplace. And with health care getting more expensive all the time, and older workers claiming more of it, I suspect a major cultural clash on the horizon. I think this issue will only get bigger for the next 20 years. ---
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/62 "2008-12-17T00:46:30Z")
> [@Lizard](#): > > I had an immediate mental answer to the question in the OP, and I went through this entire thread to see if anyone beat me to it. That no one has says something about who reads this Board. > The next civil rights battle will be against **AGEISM** , i.e. prejudice against the elderly. Compared to the number of Baby Boomers nearing retirement, the numbers of people in each group listed in the OP is minuscule. Yet it is routine to let go of older workers in favor of cheaper, younger ones who demand less from their employer and have lowered expectations. [The Supreme Court may have struck against this recently](http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/21/opinion/21sat2.html?scp=3&sq=age+discrimination&st=nyt), but that these cases even arise says a lot about what is acceptable in the workplace. And with health care getting more expensive all the time, and older workers claiming more of it, I suspect a major cultural clash on the horizon. I think this issue will only get bigger for the next 20 years. We have mentioned ageism, only we’ve only mentioned it against the young. ---
**Author:** ![Vox\_Imperatoris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Vox\_Imperatoris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Vox_Imperatoris)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/63 "2008-12-17T01:00:34Z")
And that is a legitimate concern of businesses, so they should have the right to discriminate against the old or the young as they see fit. Valete, Vox Imperatoris ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/64 "2008-12-17T04:15:59Z")
Of course, the next civil rights movement will and should be for liberation and elevation to absolute dominance of the **only** truly and undeservedly oppressed minority group in human-scum history: [**SUBGENIUSES!**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subgenius) ---
**Author:** ![Aro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b3f665/32.png) [@Aro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aro)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 8:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/65 "2008-12-17T08:41:59Z")
> [@Vox\_Imperatoris](#): > > No, he’s not. Your positions are simply idiotic. I see you went to the same charm school as Cisco, where you were taught that if you couldn’t understand something it must be wrong. We’ll start slowly - [Education](http://www.freechild.org/SNAYR/suffrage.htm) first. > [@Vox\_Imperatoris](#): > > The average person under the age of 18 is completely unskilled in political discourse compared to the average adult. The burden is on them to prove that they aren’t. Whilst I firmly disagree with your initial premise, I have to ask: What does being ‘skilled’ have to do with it? Do adults have to prove their political savvy before pulling the lever? It is an entirely arbitrary line to draw. I can only assume you would, to be consistent in your position, support an amendment to ban those over the age of 60 from voting; just on the _possibility_ or off chance they have developed Alzheimer’s or Dementia? Or maybe they are just a little bit dotty and can’t be trusted with a vote? Would you support an amendment to ban those without a college education or a degree from voting – I mean, how else could they be trusted to make informed choices if they don’t have the adequate level of education? Once you realise how unlikely these amendments are, how ridiculous their acceptance would be, they maybe you’ll begin to understand how disenfranchised an existing portion of our society is. Giving youth the option to vote doesn’t necessarily lead to block youth voting. Those who don’t care, are not interested, are free to ignore the right. But those who _do_ care, who want to be involved, would finally have a say in their future. ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 9:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/66 "2008-12-17T09:26:12Z")
Workers. As the economy has shifted away from manufacturing, workers in the new economy are [denied the right to organize](http://www.americanrightsatwork.org/publications/general/why-are-workers-rights-violations-so-rampant-20041031-298-92.html). The biggest employer is [Walmart](http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2007/04/30/us-wal-mart-denies-workers-basic-rights) which screws its workers. The labor movement is nothing new, but in recent years its hard-won gains have been rolled back. It’s time to revitalize the labor movement to regain worker’s rights-- not only for American workers, but for sweatshop and maquiladora workers in other countries whose cheap labor we enjoy at the expense of those workers, as well as our workers whose jobs have moved overseas. As the economy is globalized, the labor movement needs to globalize too. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/67 "2008-12-17T14:08:07Z")
> [@Johanna](#): > > Workers. > > As the economy has shifted away from manufacturing, workers in the new economy are [denied the right to organize](http://www.americanrightsatwork.org/publications/general/why-are-workers-rights-violations-so-rampant-20041031-298-92.html). The biggest employer is [Walmart](http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2007/04/30/us-wal-mart-denies-workers-basic-rights) which screws its workers. The labor movement is nothing new, but in recent years its hard-won gains have been rolled back. It’s time to revitalize the labor movement to regain worker’s rights-- not only for American workers, but for sweatshop and maquiladora workers in other countries whose cheap labor we enjoy at the expense of those workers, as well as our workers whose jobs have moved overseas. As the economy is globalized, the labor movement needs to globalize too. Amen! Only, what you’re describing would not be a civil-rights movement, it would be that older thing, a class struggle. **(Really** old. Marx did not invent class struggle, it runs all through the history of the Roman Republic. And was **not** what killed the Republic, BTW.) ---
**Author:** ![Backcountry\_Medic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/919ad9/32.png) [@Backcountry\_Medic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Backcountry_Medic)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/68 "2008-12-17T18:39:59Z")
I can’t understand the under-18 hate. Surely you accept that some people voted for each candidate based on nothing more than the color of their skin (both ways). Unless you are postulating that skin color is a valid reason to vote for someone, it’s no dumber than a four year old voting for Obama because he looks ‘nice’ or some ten year old voting for McCain/Palin because she thinks Palin would make a cool mom or whatever. We don’t make any attempt to validate adults reasons for voting, why should we do the same for kids? They’re just like adults, some will make decisions based on “good” reasons that matter to them (i.e. Education:Students::Gun Control:Gun Owners), some would make uninformed decisions (Just like socialist-hatin’ adults), some would be unfairly influenced by family members and most likely the vast majority just wouldn’t care enough to go push some buttons (just like adults). We don’t challenge adult voters on these issues, why are kids any different? Like was said earlier, this sounds like the same arguments people used to argue why women/minorities shouldn’t vote (too dumb, too easily influenced, etc.) What is the difference? As an aside, I never could understand why I could vote as a senior in high school (in 2000) while the majority of my friends couldn’t. We were all in the same political science class, I just had a couple of months on them, not any more experience or knowledge. ---
**Author:** ![Vox\_Imperatoris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Vox\_Imperatoris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Vox_Imperatoris)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/69 "2008-12-17T18:47:52Z")
> [@Johanna](#): > > Workers. > > As the economy has shifted away from manufacturing, workers in the new economy are [denied the right to organize](http://www.americanrightsatwork.org/publications/general/why-are-workers-rights-violations-so-rampant-20041031-298-92.html). The biggest employer is [Walmart](http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2007/04/30/us-wal-mart-denies-workers-basic-rights) which screws its workers. The labor movement is nothing new, but in recent years its hard-won gains have been rolled back. It’s time to revitalize the labor movement to regain worker’s rights-- not only for American workers, but for sweatshop and maquiladora workers in other countries whose cheap labor we enjoy at the expense of those workers, as well as our workers whose jobs have moved overseas. As the economy is globalized, the labor movement needs to globalize too. Workers are \*not \*being denied the right to organize. That would only be the case if the government came in with batons and beat them until they got back to work. They have the \*right \*to organize, and the business owners have the \*right \*to fire them if they do. Valete, Vox Imperatoris ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/70 "2008-12-17T18:59:33Z")
> [@Aro](#): > > We’ll start slowly - [Education](http://www.freechild.org/SNAYR/suffrage.htm) first. It’s a parody… no, it _has_ to be a parody… either that, or the “Cult of the Child” has reached its Jonestown moment. ---
**Author:** ![Vox\_Imperatoris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Vox\_Imperatoris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Vox_Imperatoris)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/71 "2008-12-17T19:00:30Z")
> [@Backcountry\_Medic](#): > > We don’t make any attempt to validate adults reasons for voting, why should we do the same for kids? **They’re just like adults** , some will make decisions based on “good” reasons that matter to them (i.e. Education:Students::Gun Control:Gun Owners), some would make uninformed decisions (Just like socialist-hatin’ adults), some would be unfairly influenced by family members and most likely the vast majority just wouldn’t care enough to go push some buttons (just like adults). No, kids are not just like adults. Kids are not an oppressed class. You cannot be an oppressed class if everyone in that class grows out of it. And maybe it would be better to disqualify people with Alzheimer’s or the uninformed-on-the-issues from voting. I’m not necessarily for completely universal suffrage. But it would be hard to draw a line, and going over that line would be the first step to disqualifying other groups from voting. With kids, though, it is pretty easy to draw that line. Our entire society is based on it. Besides, neither of you have offered any reasons as to why children should be able to vote. How would that benefit society? If we’re accepting that the majority of them will make stupid voting decisions, then I’d rather keep them out. Valete, Vox Imperatoris ---
**Author:** ![Vox\_Imperatoris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Vox\_Imperatoris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Vox_Imperatoris)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/72 "2008-12-17T19:07:31Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > It’s a parody… no, it _has_ to be a parody… either that, or the “Cult of the Child” has reached its Jonestown moment. That’s what I’m thinking. And if you’re wondering why I’m siding “against” my own short-term interests, it’s because I’ve seen the average high schooler. The average high schooler is a complete effing moron whose attempts to pass a basic standardized test (SAT or ACT, take your pick) on general knowledge results in an average score that would be a failing grade on any other exam. Valete, Vox Imperatoris ---
**Author:** ![Aro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b3f665/32.png) [@Aro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aro)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/73 "2008-12-17T19:11:02Z")
Wow - this fighting ignorance thing is really going to have to get back to grass roots, eh? Read [this PDF](http://www.youthrights.org/forums/downloads.php?do=file&id=61&act=down) for as a starter for 10. > [@](#): > > Through the many years since passage of the Fourteenth Amendment it has been > reasonable to rely upon age as the best and most efficient method for determining the > appropriate level of competence needed to cast an informed ballot. In spite of the fact > that some under the age of eighteen are better able to cast an informed ballot than many > of those over eighteen it was simply too difficult, to comprehensive, and too costly to > determine who those young people might be. An age requirement made perfect sense. It > was logical, reasonable, conformed to the age of conscription, and was based on sound > judgement and available information. Everyone allowed to vote was probably more > intelligent and responsible than most of those excluded due to age. It could be argued > with reasonable certainty that the number of eligible voters that were intellectually > subordinate to those under the age of eighteen was insignificant. > > But in the 1970s a monumental shift affecting this approach began. Mentally > retarded and mentally ill adults, previously universally denied the franchise, were given > access to the ballot. The expansion of this access continued until all mentally retarded > and mentally ill adults are now eligible voters (subject to the same restrictions as others). > Now everyone allowed to vote can not be presumed to be more intelligent and > responsible than most of those excluded due to age. Now an age based voter requirement > is not logical, reasonable, or based on sound judgement and available information. There > is now an opportunity to determine voter eligibility based on comparative measures of > intelligence and responsibility which is far superior to the arbitrary and inexact measure > of age. In fact, the Equal Protection Clause requires that we revisit the voting age > question in light of the changes that have taken place since passage of the Twenty-sixth > Amendment in 1970. > [@Vox Imperatoris](#): > > The average high schooler is a complete effing moron… Maybe if they had a vote to improve the quality of their education, things would begin to look up. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2008, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/74 "2008-12-17T19:19:52Z")
> [@Vox\_Imperatoris](#): > > They have the \*right \*to organize, and the business owners have the \*right \*to fire them if they do. Well, that’s fair all around, then. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Backcountry\_Medic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/919ad9/32.png) [@Backcountry\_Medic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Backcountry_Medic)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2008, 8:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/75 "2008-12-18T08:20:21Z")
> [@Vox\_Imperatoris](#): > > That’s what I’m thinking. > > And if you’re wondering why I’m siding “against” my own short-term interests, it’s because I’ve seen the average high schooler. The average high schooler is a complete effing moron whose attempts to pass a basic standardized test (SAT or ACT, take your pick) on general knowledge results in an average score that would be a failing grade on any other exam. > > Valete, > Vox Imperatoris I’m sorry, but I don’t follow your logic here at all. By your rationale, if the “average” Texan or NRA member scored poorly on SAT or ACT tests, should we disregard their votes as well? You ask why we should include children, with your main argument against it being “THEY’RE STOOPID” but our point is that lots of “stupid” people vote every election. Do you really think that these idiotic high schoolers magically grow brain cells when they turn 18? Like I said, take 100 kids: Odds are half of them won’t care or think they will make any difference, so they won’t even vote. Of the 50 left chose some number between 0 and 50 who you think are too dumb to vote. How is this any different from adults? I don’t believe in withholding franchise from someone without a good cause. I’m sure there must be some minimal threshold for independent thought (obviously no one can tell what a 6 month old is thinking), but you won’t be able to convince me that someone who is 18 years, 5 days is substantially more qualified to vote than someone 17 years, 360 days old. And so what if some 10 year old votes for McCain because (in his opinion) he seems friendly and looks like his grandpa? How does that ruin your democratic process any more than a 60 year old grandma voting for McCain because she’s afraid of “giving negroes a reason to be uppity”? I also don’t buy the argument that children aren’t a protected class because they “grow out of it” either. If we don’t consider children anything more than adults waiting to grow up, why do we have special laws dealing with child porn and abuse? They are future adults that are in the process of learning how to behave like adults. What harm is done by teaching them early on about adult responsibilities like voting? Maybe if kids learned a thing or two about voting when they were younger it might stick with them a little better and cause them to be more active, informed voters in the future? The fact that they have consistent turnover essentially negates their ability to every dominate any political debate. It’s not like 5-17 year olds are going to suddenly outnumber adult voters and vote as a block to go to war with Canada or something. Why not give the ones who care a chance to share their .02? ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2008, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/76 "2008-12-18T15:42:53Z")
> [@Aro](#): > > Wow - this fighting ignorance thing is really going to have to get back to grass roots, eh? An educated voting populace is a laudable goal (albeit something of a pipe dream, in my cynical opinion) but any system based on intelligence requirements will end up disenfranchising far more people than it brings in, including no small number of the “mentally retarded and mentally ill” championed in your own quote. There is a fatal disconnect between “the world would be a better place if everyone voted intelligently and responsibly” to “let’s only allow intelligent and responsible people to vote.” Best of luck in your fight against “ignorance,” though. ---
**Author:** ![Aro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b3f665/32.png) [@Aro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aro)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2008, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/77 "2008-12-18T15:46:35Z")
Eh? Did you actually read the PDF, or just the part I quoted? You seem to be missing the point. ---
**Author:** ![Vox\_Imperatoris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Vox\_Imperatoris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Vox_Imperatoris)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2008, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/78 "2008-12-18T17:41:20Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Well, that’s fair all around, then. :rolleyes: Yes, it is. The business owners are the ones with the money; they have no obligation to give their money to the workers, but the workers would also like to have money, so they agree to perform services in exchange for the business owners’ money. If the business owners no longer desire to keep paying money to the workers, then they have the absolute right to quit doing so, i.e. fire them (unless they agreed not to in contract, even one negotiated with a union). Valete, Vox Imperatoris ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2008, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/79 "2008-12-18T18:11:32Z")
> [@Aro](#): > > Eh? Did you actually read the PDF, or just the part I quoted? You seem to be missing the point. Sorry, I’m not going to wade through a 53-page document supporting a point you’ve already made, and I have found ludicrous. If the two paragraphs you posted weren’t revelant, why did you post them? ---
**Author:** ![Aro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b3f665/32.png) [@Aro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aro)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2008, 9:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774/80 "2008-12-19T09:04:15Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > Sorry, I’m not going to wade through a 53-page document supporting a point you’ve already made, and I have found ludicrous. If the two paragraphs you posted weren’t revelant, why did you post them? The part I posted was a small snippet in response to things said by **Vox Imperatoris**. I posted both links to give you a start in educating yourself that the topic I raised, showing firstly that it was neither a ‘parody’ nor 'idiotic’, or anything else you might think. It is a completely valid position to hold, regardless of your distain. You are, of course, free to disagree with the premise. But to attempt to dismiss it before you have even taken the time to bother reading anything says a lot more about you than it does about the validity of the position. But I really have to wonder why you bother to post in this forum at all if you have no interest in either taking part in discussion or in learning anything new. Let’s try again, as you’re not willing to educate yourself… > [@](#): > > Any discussion of rights arguably begins and ends with the right to vote. If you > have it, all rights are achievable. Without it, whatever rights you have are dubious. As > has been frequently articulated by the Supreme Court, “no right is more precious in a free > country than that of having a choice in the election of those who make the laws under > which…we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is > undermined.”1 The Court recognized voting as a fundamental right because it is the > foundation for and springboard to all other rights. Agreed so far? > [@](#): > > As high profile children’s advocates begin to embrace the > idea, arguments will be strengthened, new perspectives will surface, and the debate will > take on a more acceptable image. It is a sad commentary on the state of children’s > advocacy that this effort is as poorly received as it is. It is even sadder that our most > revered children’s advocates refuse to stand up for children on this important issue. You probably think this is a good thing, but it is something that will gain only momentum and become an inevitable conclusion to all who take the time to understand the issue. > [@](#): > > This note has focused generally on the legal argument for lowering the voting age > and the use of social science research to buttress that argument. After thoroughly > analyzing the judicial and legislative history of voting age in America it is clear that if a > compelling interest standard is applied, the age of eighteen would not pass constitutional > muster. It also seems clear that the compelling interest standard is the correct standard to > apply. From the decision in Oregon v. Mitchell to the 1970 Voting Rights Amendments > to the Civil Rights Act of 1965, every indication is that the compelling interest standard is > correct. Further, from the judicial opinions of both Oregon and Blassman v. Markworth, > it’s clear that voting age qualifications are in trouble if directly challenged. Along with > the social science research on the comparative developmental levels of MR adolescents > and non-MR children, this “trouble” becomes a lost cause. > > It’s not a question of if the voting age should be lowered, but when? So, do you have a counter argument other than ‘to my unthinking gut it seems silly’? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-look-to-the-future-what-is-the-next-great-civil-rights-movment-in-america/476774.md?page=5)