Should Mentally Retarded People Be Allowed To Vote?

[Donald Trump]

The Concept of democracy is that everyone above a certain age (normally 18) is allowed to vote, excluding convicted fellons of course.
therefore, should mentally retarded, deficient, synonym of your choice, be allowed to vote.
they are above the legal age but yet have the intellectual capacity of a person below 18.
so should they be able to vote? and give a reason why

 

[Daenerys]

It depends on how suggestive they are, if they do everything someone tells them to do, then no. Since then it would just be like that person having a second vote...

 

[Mitsuki]

Ah, this topic is too good for Voting Booth.

~Moved to Shinra Building~

Anyway, like Lord Kaos...I shall also wait for people's responses. xD

 

[Bambi]

I honestly have no idea. I guess if they have enough wits about them to know what they are doing & why then they would be fine.
But would a mentally retarded person know what it was about? Would they even want to, or even care to vote?

I guess if they are just abit slow, then Yeah they can but severly mentally retarded to the point someone has to care for them then no

Going round in circles much

 

[RioDragon]

Before I start or people start cussing the heck out of me. My little brother has downs syndrome and I am very well aware that he is classified as 'mentally challenged'.

To tell the truth, I feel that even mentally challenged people can be very smart. Hell, my little brother's an example... When he was three, he could play my sister's keyboard. And he still doesn't quite know how to talk, yet he knows how to do a LOT of things that nobody ever showed him how to do.

That said, I believe that mentally-challenge people can actually end up being HIGHLY intelligent. The problem is, they're extremely impressionable, so, when they DO see or hear that someone did something, they tend to copy them. So, I don't think they should vote unless they pass a competency test... Hell, ALL voters should take a competency test. I don't want ditzy people who just like a candidate because they fit their specific demographic to determine the fate of the country. I want them to KNOW what they're voting for.

 

[Hera Ledro]

Alright, I'll give you a post to work with.

This is one of those areas where it is EXTREMELY difficult for me to decide. Why? Because I am related to mental retards.

But both my heart and brain say no. Why? Let's look at it one piece at a time. I'll start with what good it will do them; or rather, what bad it will prevent from befalling them.

By not allowing the mentally retarded people to vote, we prevent them from making a mistake that could have serious repurcussions, especially for them. Without realizing it, these mentally handicapped people could accidentally cheeck off a box in the secret ballot or something that could bring in a government that wouldn't want to act in their best interests. It wouldn't be any fault of theirs, it's just something that would happen.

Not only would it affect them, but it could also bring in an authoritarian or rather unfriendly government into play that would go against the wishes of the rest of the country. This can be reversed, but it could still screw up the system.

Thoughts?

 

[Rockman X]

I have to be honest...

I have never seen a more brainless question posed in my lifetime. Should retarded people be allowed to vote? HELL NO.

If a person is mentally retarded, it's obvious they won't have the ability to reason and think for themselves about what candidate is best, let alone do the research on it. This would only lead to mentally healthy people persuading the handicapped ones into voting for a certain person.

So no. Stupid idea all around. But then again, most people who vote might as well be retarded anyway. Hardly anyone bothers to research the candidates and will just vote for someone "CUZ HE BLACK!" or "CUZ MAI GRANDADDY WAS DEMOCRAT!"

 

[Erythritol]

I'm sorry, no. Well...it depends on what sort of mental handicap the person has. However, if the person possesses a mental handicap that does not enable them to make a rational or informed decision, then no. It would be no more than blindly pulling a random lever. However, at the point where they cannot make a rational/informed decision, why would they care about voting in an election?

 

[Rydia]

Well if a person is mildly retarded then I do not see why they could not vote. These people can generally function in society and live on their own. They just have a low IQ.

Maybe a person who is moderately retearded could also. It would really depend on what range their IQ was.

A person who is severely or profoundly retarded then no. These people are usually in a child like state anyway and usually are not able to understand any issues presented.

I say that if the person is able to live independently on their own, or if they have a high level of functioning, then they should be allowed to vote. Either that or base it off of IQ.

 

[Fusilli]

Well when I read the title of this thread, my gut instinct was 'Lord no'. But then I read the posts and thought about it, and I'm rather undecided now.

Obviously, if a person is mentally challenged to the point that they cannot make a rational decision, then it is for the good of the country that they do not vote. Yes, I am aware that a lot of mentally challenged people can be highly intelligent, but an excellent memory does not always mean common sense and rational thinking.

However, there can be many different ways in which a person can be disabled mentally, and some cases are a lot less severe than others and these people would be capable of voting sensibly. But, really, if you are going to ban *every* mentally disabled person from voting then you may aswell ban all of the idiots in the country aswell, or anyone who is prejudiced in their voting, which I know is a lot of people. I mean, the Government could obviously not go around EVERYone to see how stupid/sensible they are, and then make a personal choice about them all deciding who should vote and who shouldn't.

So anyway, to sum up, I would still go with my gut instinct which is no, because atleast there is a lower percentage of people voting who maybe shouldn't be.

 

[Zanmato]

I'm affraid I have to say no. They can be way too easy influneced by evil people(and there are quite a lot of them in this world) to vote for one of those governments that aren't "nice". And that could affect everyone in their country. Seriously...not cool.
Sure I sound heartless and cold but the things I wrote above could come true and....well....better not to think about it.(knocks on wood)

 

[Miss Valentine]

I think I will probably go with the idea most of you guys have. Not everyone who is mentally ill or disabled is afflicted badly enough to not understand the voting system, but that would probably be the minority of overall cases. It's sad because it takes away one of their basic human rights, the freedom of speech, but in most cases it's probably for the best, as any person who tries to unfairly influence anyone's vote is violating that person's human rights anyway.

My brother is Autistic, and I don't think he'll ever be in a position to vote. He is very clever when it comes to computers and maths, and yet he can barely dress himself. He has trouble even understanding my mum's rules, never mind politics. However many disorders have a "spectrum" of affliction, and some people may only border on that spectrum, and probably function quite highly. Autism alone has such a wide spectrum that there are certainly going to be some Autistic people who can think quite freely. Though as I said before, they are usually in the minority.

I like the idea of an aptitude test, because it would at least give someone a chance to prove they are of sound enough mind to understand politics and vote, but yeah I really can't say for sure, there's no clear answer on this one.

 

[Kellzie]

I guess it depends on the intensity of there mental illness. If they are capable to understand what they want from our government and find a candidate that they like y not. THere are diff levels of retardation. It depends on each individual case.

 

[Red Rose]

MAn What an intresting topic but instead of saying yes or no I gotta just go for the general statement here you know?

First off... If wego by masses in general we have ppl who will absolutely vote against Obama because he is a black man we have ppl who absolutely vote against Hilary because of the fact she is a white woman.

My friend told me the other day While I was at scholl pls no one here even take this the wrong way this is just what she said. Most of her latino family WILL absolutely not vote on Obama because most Latinos do not like black ppl anyways.

The fact of the matter is Biased is Biased. Alot of ppl will look for anything to NOT vote for someone and those ppl who are the undecided voters are very easily swayed just as much as mentally disabled ppl.

The thing is I can sway my friend to vote for huckabee one minute and I probably can get him to vote Obama the next. If we go by the world in general, is letting a mentally handicapped person vote any worse then letting any regular person who is easily swayed or convinced vote. Most of the world don't research candidates. Why? Who knows. the fact is that in the U.S ignorant ppl are everywhere and they will vote for one thing or another just based off of one stupid thing.

Ex. Hilary won New York. Who DIDN'T see that one comming? same with Obama and Illinois. *thinks it's Illinois correct me if I'm wrong pls*

Having someone who is racist vote is stupid. Having some undecided voter vote is also stupid. If we go by generality Alot of ppl shouldn't be voting anyways. In the defense over mentally Disabled they should be counted as regular voters in a way and non regular voters in another way. The non regular is obvious and the regular is simply due to the fact that other redneckish KKK ppl will vote hilary and "Gangsta's" up in the hood will vote Obama becausse of the fact he is black. 88% speaks you know. Or how married woman who love lawyer ish shows that try and help kids will vote for Hilary since she was a Lawyer who helped children.

Either way letting someone mentally disabled vote is just like letting an extremely Biased person vote. Not very many ppl look at the issue's anyways. All you gotta do is say to the press Hilary Clinton is a Lesbian who does drugs *obviously not a lie and a stupid statement* and that one statement could make ppl NOT vote for her.

Everyone freaks out over things that ARE not in the true sense of politics I mean wtf how is her being a lesbian gonna make the world worse off than what it is that has nothing to do with it *unless your against Gay's and Lesbians*

But I guess that's politics.

On to the main topic well I guess you already know I am voting undecided to me it seems pointless and in a way it's singling out a group of ppl for the way they were born. Yet, we would need to single more ppl out in this catagory anyways since some ppl don't understand enough as it is. Sad to say it myself, it contradicts what I believe in. I am all about Human rights in the U.S but I guess it can't be helped... To have a good politics system where all votes were counted as equal because the ppl understood them all I can say is.

*Segregation anyone?*

 

[Rydia]

I think I will probably go with the idea most of you guys have. Not everyone who is mentally ill or disabled is afflicted badly enough to not understand the voting system, but that would probably be the minority of overall cases. It's sad because it takes away one of their basic human rights, the freedom of speech, but in most cases it's probably for the best, as any person who tries to unfairly influence anyone's vote is violating that person's human rights anyway.

My brother is Autistic, and I don't think he'll ever be in a position to vote. He is very clever when it comes to computers and maths, and yet he can barely dress himself. He has trouble even understanding my mum's rules, never mind politics. However many disorders have a "spectrum" of affliction, and some people may only border on that spectrum, and probably function quite highly. Autism alone has such a wide spectrum that there are certainly going to be some Autistic people who can think quite freely. Though as I said before, they are usually in the minority.

I like the idea of an aptitude test, because it would at least give someone a chance to prove they are of sound enough mind to understand politics and vote, but yeah I really can't say for sure, there's no clear answer on this one.

Actually, about 90% of all people classified as Mentally Retarded only have a mild case. It might not be as noticable because you might not even realize that those people are retarded in any way. They might just appear to be someone with a very low IQ.

Only about 1-2% of people diagnosed with MR are profoundly retarded and about 3-4% are severly.

 

[Koloth]

OK, I guess I am going to add my opinions here. For one sometimes people are labeled retarded that in truth are not. As for making a law to not allow certain types of people to vote is not constitutional. Everybody, over a certain age has the right to vote. If a person was severely mentally disabled, they probably would not be able to handle a ballot anyway.

To be honest, people who supposedly have a normal intelligence make stupid decisions at the ballot. Look at who got elected twice for President of the US.

 

[Red Rose]

OK, I guess I am going to add my opinions here. For one sometimes people are labeled retarded that in truth are not. As for making a law to not allow certain types of people to vote is not constitutional. Everybody, over a certain age has the right to vote. If a person was severely mentally disabled, they probably would not be able to handle a ballot anyway.

To be honest, people who supposedly have a normal intelligence make stupid decisions at the ballot. Look at who got elected twice for President.

That's pretty much the point I was trying to pull.

Althought there is really no way to avoid that issue *If I had my way the ppl who made stupid decisions making votes wouldn't be voting* It really doesn't matter everyone has the right to vote and convincing others is what the candidates are supposed to be doing.

When someone just votes it can make our lives that much harder when the winning vote happens to be the vote we didn't want.

But on a daily basis it's not like this doesn't happen regularly like the guy that cuts you off on the freeway or the little screaming child in a restuarant.

Our lives are dictated by stupid ppl making stupid choices that's why we have laws

 

[Scarlet]

OK, I guess I am going to add my opinions here. For one sometimes people are labeled retarded that in truth are not. As for making a law to not allow certain types of people to vote is not constitutional. Everybody, over a certain age has the right to vote. If a person was severely mentally disabled, they probably would not be able to handle a ballot anyway.

To be honest, people who supposedly have a normal intelligence make stupid decisions at the ballot. Look at who got elected twice for President of the US.

Uhhh yes, and look who was running against him... You've got Manbearpig (Al Gore) the first time running up against Bush. Take a good look at Al Gore now by the way. Then you got John Kerry.... HAHAHHAHAH. Kerry is right behind Gore, he was a terrible candidate! Kerry couldn't even handle a good argument against Bush. All of Kerry's arguments was: "Well.... Uhhh... I DISAGREE!" This country would have been fucked either way.

 

[Crazee Dayzee]

It depends on the severity of the retardation.

If anyone, retarded or not, is not at an adequate level of intelligence, they should not be allowed to vote. By intelligence, they should be able to make rational decisions and be capable of advanced comprehension/reasoning. We don't want people who were manipulated or are ignorant to vote.

 

[Soul Saver]

No. Just as there should be voting tests to determine basic mental competence.