Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

We need to bar certain people from voting

Like, I genuinely think we should have a questionnaire before each election for each citizen to see if they are mentally capable of understanding the difference between causation and correlation. If you are unable to connect opinions to verifiable fact, you should have no say in government

Edit: If you feel personally attacked by this, maybe it's time to reevaluate whether your own opinions are based in fact. I neither mentioned nor suggested that any party or political affiliation is guilty of incoherent ideas lol

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

JoePourMan · 61-69, M

Here is the problem with your idea.
Fact: Medical experts have determined that an unborn is a life.
Fact: Medical experts have determined that an unborn is not a life
Fact: Courts have ruled that an unborn is a life.
Fact: Courts have ruled that an unborn is not a life.
Who do you propose should be the arbiter of these competing facts? Who should be denied their constitutional right to vote, those who are pro-choice or those who are pro-life?

helenS · 36-40, F

@JoePourMan I thought the original post is only a joke?
He can't be serious when he says only professors should be allowed to vote or run for an office. He must be joking.

KidAzazel · 26-30

@JoePourMan Well, in the case of an issue that doesn't have any clear factual backing, of course you would have to rely on opinion. However, in regards to pro-life and pro-choice, the question isn't whether or not an unborn is a life. Every cell in your body, from your bones to your brain tissue, is a life in and of itself. The question is more of a philosophical one than a scientific one, in that we are questioning whether an unborn should be seen as a human life. But, if a ruling is made in favor of primarily religious ideologies, that's a violation of separation of church and state, in my opinion. Issues that are only debated because of religion shouldn't be considered at all. Gay marriage, abortion, etc. should not be political issues. Our government is a secular entity and was supposed to be from the beginning

KidAzazel · 26-30

@helenS It doesn't take a professor to realize what is or isn't linked to real evidence lol Especially in the age of information

helenS · 36-40, F

@KidAzazel You said "mentally capable of understanding the difference between causation and correlation"

KidAzazel · 26-30

@helenS Exactly. Do you understand what the words "causation" and "correlation" mean? If not, allow me to clarify:

Causation: The act of causing something
Correlation: A mutual relation of two or more things

So, just because some things are related in a way, it doesn't mean one is caused by another. This is important because most conspiracy theorists, as an example, emphasize correlation, but correlation means nothing without causation. For example, if you were being tried for murder, and you were accused simply because you knew the victim better than anyone else (correlation), that would be unfair, right? But, if there were evidence that made clear the fact that you indeed murdered that person (causation), only then would it be appropriate to punish you by law