I missed the Cofty episode where Dawkins transformed from a wise oracle to being tragically out of touch. What gives? Have Peterson, Harris, Dennett and others suffered a similar fate?
Plus I welcome radical ideas because they make you check your assumptions. I just don’t see the worth in labelling people “retard” just for thinking outside the box.
To me the important thing about voting is that it’s voluntary and the person has the ability to make their own decision. Most children don’t care about voting or may rely upon parents if asked to make a decision. Those are the main problems with children voting as I see it. But if there are a few children who want to vote and have their own ideas about who they want to vote for, on what basis do I say they are not allowed? It’s not such an easy question to answer really, because many adults lack such interest or independence yet they have the right anyway. Do we say they are not allowed just because they are children and for no other reason?