Should Parents Vote on Behalf of Their Kids? J.D. Vance Isn’t the Only One Who Thinks So

Michie said:

The Republican vice-presidential candidate has come under fire for his views on ‘parental voting,’ but the idea isn’t new and isn’t necessarily partisan.

Sen. J.D. Vance has been under fire this week after the GOP vice-presidential nominee’s three-year-old comments about the “childless left” and promoting family formation resurfaced in the media.

Among the most controversial? The claim that parents should be able to vote on behalf of their underage kids.

“Let’s give votes to all children in this country, but let’s give control over those votes to the parents of those children,” said Vance in a 2021 talk hosted by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. “When you go to the polls in this country as a parent, you should have more power. You should have more of an ability to speak your voice in our democratic republic than people who don’t have kids.”

At the time, Vance described his proposal as an attempt to overcome a “structural democratic disadvantage” to pursuing pro-family policies in America.

But media reactions have framed the proposal as an attempt to disenfranchise childless people. Some have criticized Vance for saying that those without kids are relatively less committed to the country’s future.

“This is such a heinous notion that it’s hard to believe a politician would even think this to himself, let alone say it out loud,” said BuzzFeed’s Morgan Sloss, who describes herself as “intentionally childfree.”


Continued below.

Should Parents Vote on Behalf of Their Kids? JD Vance Isn’t the Only One Who Thinks So

The Republican vice-presidential candidate has come under fire for his views on ‘parental voting,’ but the idea isn’t new and isn’t necessarily partisan.

www.ncregister.com

Click to expand...

Ask Civics 101: Why Is Our Voting Age 18?

We take it for granted that the voting age is 18 in the United States, but it hasn’t always been this way. We lowered that age from 21 in the seventies —…

www.nhpr.org

Voting at 16: Turnout and the quality of vote choice

Critics of giving citizens under 18 the right to vote argue that such teenagers lack the ability and motivation to participate effectively in elections. If this argument is true, lowering the voting age would have negative consequences for the quality ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

dzheremi said:

No, people who have children should not have "more power" in the voting booth than those who do not have kids. That idea is inherently undemocratic. The concept we are supposed to operate by is "one man, one vote", not "your vote counts more if you're a parent than if you aren't."

I don't like this J.D. Vance character. He seems to have a real problem with childless people, and his assumption that being childless is some kind of left-wing lifestyle choice for everyone who is in that state, rather than the result of many different circumstances. His idea that childless people are somehow "less invested" in the future of this country than those who have children is just flat out wrong and based in nothing. As one of the commenters on the linked YouTube video points out, George Washington had no children of his own. Does that mean that George Washington, of all people, was somehow less invested in the future of the country? Or at least less invested than his wife, she since had children from a previous marriage? The reasoning is ridiculous on its face.

Click to expand...

dzheremi said:

No, people who have children should not have "more power" in the voting booth than those who do not have kids. That idea is inherently undemocratic. The concept we are supposed to operate by is "one man, one vote", not "your vote counts more if you're a parent than if you aren't."

I don't like this J.D. Vance character. He seems to have a real problem with childless people, and his assumption that being childless is some kind of left-wing lifestyle choice for everyone who is in that state, rather than the result of many different circumstances. His idea that childless people are somehow "less invested" in the future of this country than those who have children is just flat out wrong and based in nothing. As one of the commenters on the linked YouTube video points out, George Washington had no children of his own. Does that mean that George Washington, of all people, was somehow less invested in the future of the country? Or at least less invested than his wife, she since had children from a previous marriage? The reasoning is ridiculous on its face.

Click to expand...

Michie said:

The Republican vice-presidential candidate has come under fire for his views on ‘parental voting,’ but the idea isn’t new and isn’t necessarily partisan.

Sen. J.D. Vance has been under fire this week after the GOP vice-presidential nominee’s three-year-old comments about the “childless left” and promoting family formation resurfaced in the media.

Among the most controversial? The claim that parents should be able to vote on behalf of their underage kids.

“Let’s give votes to all children in this country, but let’s give control over those votes to the parents of those children,” said Vance in a 2021 talk hosted by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. “When you go to the polls in this country as a parent, you should have more power. You should have more of an ability to speak your voice in our democratic republic than people who don’t have kids.”

At the time, Vance described his proposal as an attempt to overcome a “structural democratic disadvantage” to pursuing pro-family policies in America.

But media reactions have framed the proposal as an attempt to disenfranchise childless people. Some have criticized Vance for saying that those without kids are relatively less committed to the country’s future.

“This is such a heinous notion that it’s hard to believe a politician would even think this to himself, let alone say it out loud,” said BuzzFeed’s Morgan Sloss, who describes herself as “intentionally childfree.”


Continued below.

Should Parents Vote on Behalf of Their Kids? JD Vance Isn’t the Only One Who Thinks So

The Republican vice-presidential candidate has come under fire for his views on ‘parental voting,’ but the idea isn’t new and isn’t necessarily partisan.

www.ncregister.com

Click to expand...

Michie said:

The Republican vice-presidential candidate has come under fire for his views on ‘parental voting,’ but the idea isn’t new and isn’t necessarily partisan.

Sen. J.D. Vance has been under fire this week after the GOP vice-presidential nominee’s three-year-old comments about the “childless left” and promoting family formation resurfaced in the media.

Among the most controversial? The claim that parents should be able to vote on behalf of their underage kids.

“Let’s give votes to all children in this country, but let’s give control over those votes to the parents of those children,” said Vance in a 2021 talk hosted by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. “When you go to the polls in this country as a parent, you should have more power. You should have more of an ability to speak your voice in our democratic republic than people who don’t have kids.”

At the time, Vance described his proposal as an attempt to overcome a “structural democratic disadvantage” to pursuing pro-family policies in America.

But media reactions have framed the proposal as an attempt to disenfranchise childless people. Some have criticized Vance for saying that those without kids are relatively less committed to the country’s future.

“This is such a heinous notion that it’s hard to believe a politician would even think this to himself, let alone say it out loud,” said BuzzFeed’s Morgan Sloss, who describes herself as “intentionally childfree.”


Continued below.

Should Parents Vote on Behalf of Their Kids? JD Vance Isn’t the Only One Who Thinks So

The Republican vice-presidential candidate has come under fire for his views on ‘parental voting,’ but the idea isn’t new and isn’t necessarily partisan.

www.ncregister.com

Click to expand...

Michie said:

The Republican vice-presidential candidate has come under fire for his views on ‘parental voting,’ but the idea isn’t new and isn’t necessarily partisan.

Sen. J.D. Vance has been under fire this week after the GOP vice-presidential nominee’s three-year-old comments about the “childless left” and promoting family formation resurfaced in the media.

Among the most controversial? The claim that parents should be able to vote on behalf of their underage kids.

“Let’s give votes to all children in this country, but let’s give control over those votes to the parents of those children,” said Vance in a 2021 talk hosted by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. “When you go to the polls in this country as a parent, you should have more power. You should have more of an ability to speak your voice in our democratic republic than people who don’t have kids.”

At the time, Vance described his proposal as an attempt to overcome a “structural democratic disadvantage” to pursuing pro-family policies in America.

But media reactions have framed the proposal as an attempt to disenfranchise childless people. Some have criticized Vance for saying that those without kids are relatively less committed to the country’s future.

“This is such a heinous notion that it’s hard to believe a politician would even think this to himself, let alone say it out loud,” said BuzzFeed’s Morgan Sloss, who describes herself as “intentionally childfree.”


Continued below.

Should Parents Vote on Behalf of Their Kids? JD Vance Isn’t the Only One Who Thinks So

The Republican vice-presidential candidate has come under fire for his views on ‘parental voting,’ but the idea isn’t new and isn’t necessarily partisan.

www.ncregister.com

Click to expand...

eleos1954 said:

It is true ... people with children have a different outlook about the future than those who do not ... that don't mean anyone is for maligning people that do not have children ... it's your choice to have children ... or not.

Before children, many of us are focused on issues and goals that relate to our own fulfillment and satisfaction. It puts one in position to think about somebody else's welfare (their children's) rather than themselves.

Click to expand...

Sword of the Lord said:

You might not like some of the "extremes" that come with JD Vance, but when the alternative is transgenderism, rampant homosexuality, indoctrination and mutilation of children and young adults, satanism, societal and moral decay, baby murder, assault on the Christian faith, election interference, open borders and on and on

Click to expand...

Michie said:

I never liked him. The more he speaks, the less I like him. He is going to be a thorn in Trump’s side and a great gift to the Democrats.

Click to expand...