Today’s teens are known to be uninterested in politics, and some of the reasons they are uninterested is, that they do not care about politics because it does not affect them, teenagers simply do not know about politics, and teens have been raised in the age of social media. The first reason that researchers do not think teens are interested in politics is that teens do not care about politics because it does not affect them. For example, Sarah-Jayne Blakemore, a cognitive neuroscientist from University College London, UK has done research on why adolescents always puts themselves first. The research showed that teens use a different a different part of their brain compared to adults, which makes them more selfish. In other words teens are
…show more content…
Glenn Harvard Reynolds agrees that teens should not vote and he quotes, “Those too fragile to handle different opinions are too fragile to participate in politics.” Reynolds point is that if teens can not even take in other people’s opinions they should not have the right to vote. Another example of teens not being mature enough to vote is that they are politically less mature compared to how adults are. A study done by Mr. Chan and Mr. Clayton titled, “Should the Voting Age be Lowered to Sixteen? Denied the option to lower the voting age. Then Mr. Chan and Mr. Clayton stated, “ Drawing on empirical data collected in nationally representative surveys, we argue that the weight of such evidence suggests that young people are, to a significant degree, politically less mature than older people, and that voting age the should not be lowered to sixteen.” In other words, they believe that teens are not politically mature enough to vote. Lastly, sixteen year olds are immature because they are still children. Friedersdorf implies that even college students still act like children and they are still too young to be responsible for their actions and that children should not vote. Friedersdorf’s point is that sixteen year olds are still too young to …show more content…
In his article, “Voting Rights’ Next Frontier: 16 Year-Olds,” Sam Brodey, confirms, “Regardless of whom it would help if anyone most observers believe a lowering of the voting age is unlikely to happen anytime soon. Doing so would require an amendment to the Constitution.” This means that lowering the voting age is probably not going to happen and if did it happen it would be extremely hard. Ellison notes, “Sixteen-year-old students need to raise their voices.” Ellison also said that it would require a “movement” on the part of the teenagers. Basically, it means that if sixteen year olds really want to vote that they would have to raise their voices and stand up if the voting age would ever change. The last and final reason why lowering the voting age would cause big change is that the states would have to agree for lowering the voting age. Miranda Rosenberg a sixteen year old who wants to vote, says that she must get 489,000 signatures from voters in Florida and she thinks that is a big task to do. Basically, if teenagers really want the voting age to be lowered then
Glenn Harvard Reynolds agrees that teens should not vote and he quotes, “Those too fragile to handle different opinions are too fragile to participate in politics.” Reynolds point is that if teens can not even take in other people’s opinions they should not have the right to vote. Another example of teens not being mature enough to vote is that they are politically less mature compared to how adults are. A study done by Mr. Chan and Mr. Clayton titled, “Should the Voting Age be Lowered to Sixteen? Denied the option to lower the voting age. Then Mr. Chan and Mr. Clayton stated, “ Drawing on empirical data collected in nationally representative surveys, we argue that the weight of such evidence suggests that young people are, to a significant degree, politically less mature than older people, and that voting age the should not be lowered to sixteen.” In other words, they believe that teens are not politically mature enough to vote. Lastly, sixteen year olds are immature because they are still children. Friedersdorf implies that even college students still act like children and they are still too young to be responsible for their actions and that children should not vote. Friedersdorf’s point is that sixteen year olds are still too young to …show more content…
In his article, “Voting Rights’ Next Frontier: 16 Year-Olds,” Sam Brodey, confirms, “Regardless of whom it would help if anyone most observers believe a lowering of the voting age is unlikely to happen anytime soon. Doing so would require an amendment to the Constitution.” This means that lowering the voting age is probably not going to happen and if did it happen it would be extremely hard. Ellison notes, “Sixteen-year-old students need to raise their voices.” Ellison also said that it would require a “movement” on the part of the teenagers. Basically, it means that if sixteen year olds really want to vote that they would have to raise their voices and stand up if the voting age would ever change. The last and final reason why lowering the voting age would cause big change is that the states would have to agree for lowering the voting age. Miranda Rosenberg a sixteen year old who wants to vote, says that she must get 489,000 signatures from voters in Florida and she thinks that is a big task to do. Basically, if teenagers really want the voting age to be lowered then