16 and voting? Seminar

We had an in-class seminar on an article that spoke about whether or not teenagers, beginning at age 16, should be given the right to vote in the presidential campaign. The article we used as groundwork for our arguments was "You're 16, you're beautiful, and you're a voter". This text was clearly written in support of the argument for lowering the voting age, and used numerous arguments from various points to support that conclusion.

Our seminar was full of important ideas and points. For example, if sixteen year olds were thought responsible enough to choose the nations president, were they mature enough to have a drinking license, or to wed? This topic jumped about in our seminar, some people stating that yes, they were mature enough, and it was the right thing to do. And others disagreeing, saying that they definitely were not mature enough, and would take such freedom too far.

I felt that I participated a good amount in the seminar. I read the article, and annotated parts and quotes that I found important. I made points about the questionable maturity of teenagers, and how lowering the voting age may have to do with other age restrictions.

At the beginning of the seminar, it was clear that the groups for and against lowering the voting age were split almost half and half. I myself found it difficult to come to a conclusion, since both sides presented such strong arguments. In the end, I chose to support the idea of lowering the voting age, but was very much against lowering the age on other bans, such as the right to drink alcohol.

Overall, I think this was a very productive seminar. Everyone spoke at least once about how they felt, people were polite, and the conversation moved along.